FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC U IT APRIL13 , 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 14946 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 0 8 3 - CR- T- 2 4 - M SS U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s H U B E R M O R E N O , a .k .a . L ib a r d o M o r e n o - G o n z le z , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A p r i l13, 2006) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an d D U B IN A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: A p p e lla n t H u b e rM o r e n o ap p e a ls h is 1 3 5 - m o n th s e n te n c e f o rc o n s p ir a c y to2

po ss es s w i th i nt entt o d i stri bu t e c ocai ne w hi l e abo ar d a vess el subj ec tt o U ni t ed S ta te s ju r is d ic tio n , in v io la tio n o f 4 6 U .S .C . A p p . § 1 9 0 3 ( a ) , ( g ) , ( j) , 2 1 U .S .C . § 9 6 0 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) ( ii) , 1 8 U .S .C . § 2 , a n d p o s s e s s io n w ith in te n t to d is tr ib u te c o c a in e , in v i o l a t i o n o f

4 6 U. S . C . Ap p . § 1 9 0 3 ( a ) , ( g ) , 2 1 U. S . C . § 9 6 0 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) ( i i ) . On ap p e a l, M o r e n o a r g u e s th a t h is o n ly f u n c tio n w a s a s am e c h a n ic , a n d h e w a s ala s tm i nu t e hi re on the cr ew of the “ go -f as t ” ves se l (“ G F V ”) thatthe U ni t ed S t at es C oa s tG ua r d i nt e r c e pt e d, s e a r c he d, a nd f r om w hi c h i tr e c ove r e d 1, 968 ki l ogr a m s of coca i ne. H e c on t ends thathe had n o i nt er es ti n the cocai ne, and w as a l ow -l evel i nd i vi du al i n the ov er al l conspi ra cy . B as ed on hi s part i ci pat i on , M oreno argues th a tth e g u i d e l i n e s m a n d a t e d h i s b a s e o f f e n s e l e v e l b e c ap p e d a t3 0 u n d e rU. S . S . G. § 2 D 1 .1 ( a ) ( 3 ) . H e c o n c lu d e s th a t a n a d ju s tm e n t f

o rh is s m a ll r o le in th e o f f e n s e is appr opr i a t e unde ra n a dvi s ory gui de l i ne s s y s t e m , a nd the f a i l ur e t o gr a nthi m one s tif le s C o n g r e s s ’s in te n t th a t lo w - le v e l tr a f f ic k e r s r e c e iv e o n e . N o rm a lly , w e d o n o t c o n s id e ra r g u m e n ts r a is e d f o rth e f ir s t tim e o n ap p e a l. U n ite d S ta te s v . P r ic h e tt , 8 9 8 F .2 d 1 3 0 , 1 3 1 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 0 ) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) ; se e a l so U ni te d State s v . B r oke m ond , 959 F . 2d 206, 210 ( 11th C i r . 1992) ( appl i c a nt pr e c l ude d f

r om r a i s i ng i s s ue r e l a t e d t o U . S . S . G . § 3E 1. 1 r e duc t i on w he n he di d not f i l e a n obj e c t i on t o the P S I a nd di d notobj e c tw he n the di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notgr a nt th e d e p a rtu r e ) . T h is ru le ap p lie s to s e n te n c in g p r o c e e d in g s . P r ic h e tt , 89 8 F . 2d at3

1 3 1 ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) . I n a d d itio n , 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 7 4 2 ( a ) d o e s n o t au th o r iz e u s to c o n s id e rad e f

e n d a n t’s ap p e a l o f

th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d is c r e tio n a ry d e c is io n n o t to ap p ly ad o w n w a r d d e p a rtu r e . U ni te d State s v . W

i ni nge ar , 422 F . 3d 1241, 1245 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ; see a l

so U ni te d State s v . W

r i ght , 89 5 F . 2d 71 8, 72 0 (11 th C i r. 19 90 ) ( § 3 74 2 d oes notcogn i ze a c l ai m thatthe di stri ctcourtfa i l ed t o d epart further) . T o th e e x te n t th a t M o r e n o a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e d in f a ilin g to departdo w nw ar d from the gu i del i ne ra ng e, w e do n othave autho ri ty und er§ 3742( a ) t o c ons i de rhi s c l a i m . T o the e xt e nttha tM or e no’ s appe a l m a y be c ons i de r e d t o be a s s e rt i ng tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d i n f a i l i ng t o pr ovi de am i nor r ol e r e duc t i on, hi s a r gum e nt s a r e a l s o notpr ope r l y be f or e us . A ts e nt e nc i ng, M or e no a r gue d tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourts houl d de pa rtf r om the appl i c abl e gui de l i ne rang e, part l y bec ause he w as no tas i nv ol ved w i th the conspi ra cyas the other m e m be r s of

the G F V ’ s c r e w . H e di d nota r gue tha the w a s e nt i t l e d t o ar e duc t i on a s am i norpa rt i c i pa ntorothe rw i s e obj e c tt o the P S I ’ s f a i l ur e t o pr ovi de s uc h a re du ct i on . A cc ordi ng l y, any argum entre gardi ng a m i t i gat i ng rol e r educt i on un der U. S . S . G. § 3 B 1 . 2 i s n o tp r o p e r l y b e f o r e u s . F o rth e ab o v e - s t a t e d r e a s o n s , we af fi rm M oreno’ s s ent ence . AF F I RME D.