2007 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 4-23-2007 

# U SA v . S h all P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 06-2710

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2007 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . S h all " (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1233. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/1233NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 06- 2710 UNI T E D S T AT E S OF AM E RI CA ,

v. J ESS I CA M . SHA LL,

A ppel l ant

O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia (D . C . C ri m i nal N o. 04 -cr -0001 6J) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H on. K i m R . G i bs on Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

A pr i l 12, 2007 B E FO R E : SM I T H and C O W E N , C i r cui tJ udges

and Y O H N *, D i s t r i ctJ udge ( Fi l ed: A pr i l 23, 2007) OP I NI ON

* H o n o rab le W il li am H . Y o h n Jr. , S en ior U n it ed S tat es D istri ct Ju d g e f o r th e E astern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a, s i t t i ng bydes i gnat i on.2

C O W E N , C i r cui tJ udge. J es s i ca M . Shal l appea l s fr om a j udgm entof convi ct i on and s ent ence ent er ed byt he U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tfort he W es t ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a, fol l ow i ng herpl ea of g u il tyto three ch arg es o f m ak ing a f alse statem en t t o a f

ed era ll yli ce n sed firearm s d ea ler, i n vi ol at i on of 18 U . S. C . § 922( a) ( 6) . Shal l chal l enges t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s deni al of a dow nw ar d adj us t m entform i t i gat i ng r ol e pur s uantt o U . S. S. G . § 3B 1. 2. Fort he r eas ons s t a t e d b e l o w, we wi l l a f f i r m. I. B eca us e w e w r i t e onl yfort he part i es , w e r eci t e onl yt hos e fa ct s nece s s aryt o our di s pos i t i on. O n fours epar at e occ as i ons betw een A pr i l 15, 2003 and A ugus t25, 2003, Shal l pur chas ed fourt o s i x fi r earm s fr om a l i cens ed fi r earm s deal eri n A l t oona, Penns y l vani a. I n addi t i on, on A pr i l 21, 2003, Shal l pur chas ed tw o m or e fi r earm s fr om l i cens ed fi r earm s deal er s , one fr om a dea l eri n D uncans vi l l e, Penns y l vani a, and the other fr om a dea l eri n H ol l i day s bur g, Penns y l vani a. Foreac h t r ans act i on, Shal l compl et ed B ur eau of

A l cohol , T obacc o, Fi r earm s and Expl os i ves ( “A T F”) form 4473, r epr es ent i ng th a t s h e w a s th e a c tu a l p u rc h a s e r o f th e f ir e a rm s . D ur i ng i nt ervi ew s w i t h A T F agent s conduct ed on A ugus t26, 2003, and Sept ember 4, 2003, Shal l admi t t ed thats he w as a “s t r aw - pur chas er ” of tw enty - t hr ee f i r earm s fr om t hr ee f eder al l yl i cens ed dea l er s . Shal l t ol d t he age nt s t hats he made t he pur chas es for , and del i ver ed fi r earm s t o, t w o i ndi vi dual s i n J er s eyC i t y , i n excha nge for$250 t o $300 for3

each g un . S he ad m i t t ed to the ag ents t hat s he k new t hat purchasi ng t he g un s und er tho se c irc u m sta n c e s w a s a g a in st th e law . In a su b se q u e n t sta tem e n t to A T F a g e n ts, S h a ll cont i nued t o admi tt hats he w as a s t r aw - pur chas erof the fi r earm s , butcl ai m ed thather boy fr i end, E r i c Sager , concoc t ed the ent i r e s cheme. She cl ai m ed thatSagerarr anged a nd negot i at ed the s al es ; i ns t ruct ed heron w her e t o buyt he guns , w hatt ype of guns t o buy , and how m anyt o buy ; furni s hed herw i t h m oneyt o buyt he guns ; tr ans por t ed the guns t o a N e w J e rs e yb u y e r; a n d th e n k e p t th e p ro c e e d s . A tcour tpr ocee di ngs on J une 2, 2004, Shal l w ai ved herr i ghtt o an i ndi ctm entby g ra n d ju rya n d p led g u iltyto th e th re e c h a rg e s o f m a k in g a f

a lse sta tem e n t to a f

e d e ra lly l i cens ed fi r earm s deal er , i n vi ol at i on of 18 U . S. C . § 922( a) ( 6) . A s par tof a pr offe rof pr oof, t he governm enti ndi cat ed thatt he evi dence w oul d s how t hatShal l knew t hather s t at ement s on t he A T F for m s w er e fa l s e, i n t hats he pur chas ed the fi r earm s on behal f of o th e r p e rso n s. S h a ll ag re e d th a t th e in f o rm a tio n p ro f

f e re d b yth e g o v e rn m e n t w a s tru e to t he bes tof herknow l edge. Pr i ort o s ent enci ng, Shal l fi l ed a r eques tfora dow nw ar d adj us t m entform i t i gat i ng rol e pu rs uan tt o U . S . S . G . § 3 B 1. 2. S he sou gh ta fou r- l evel adj ust m ent for herrol e as a m i ni m al par t i ci pant , or , al t ernat i vel y , ei t hera tw o- l evel adj us t m entas a mi norpar t i ci pant ora thr ee- l evel adj us t m entforherr ol e fa l l i ng betw een mi ni m al par t i ci pantand mi nor par t i ci pant . A ts ent enci ng, Shal l ar gued thats he w as ent i t l ed t o a dow nw ar d adj us t m ent4

f o r m iti g a tin g ro le b e c a u se h e r p a rticip a tio n w a s lim ited to sh o w in g h e r id e n tific a tio n to t he fir earm s deal ers and t aking po sses si on of the fi rearm s. B ase d u p o n the in fo rm ati o n p rese n ted a t th e se n tenc ing h ea ri n g , the D istri ct C o u rt found thatShal l w as nott he s ol e part i ci panti n t he fi r earm s offe ns e, butdeni ed heran adj us t m entunderU . S. S. G . § 3B 1. 2 fora mi t i gat i ng r ol e, r eas oni ng: M s . Shal l , I bel i eve thaty ou ar e s or r yforw haty ou di d, butt he fa ctr emai ns t haty ouract i ons r es ul t ed i n 23 fi r earm s pl ace d i nt o t he s t r eam of com m er ce, and w hi ch coul d have be en us ed i n s er i ous offe ns es and cr i m es . T hi s t ype of con du ctcan’tbe tol erat ed. I do no tfi nd t hat y ou r r ole i n thi s offen se i s a m in o r ro le. O n lyy o u k n o w w h yy o u d id it, a n d if o th e rs w e re sig n if

ica n tly i nvol ved then ce r t ai nl yt hei rconducti s nott o be condone d ei t her , butnei t her i s y ou rs . ( A pp. at59. ) T he D i s t r i ctC our ts ent ence d Shal l t o a t erm of i m pr i s onm entof tw el ve m o n ths a n d o n e d ayfo r ea ch o f th e thre e c o u n ts, to b e se rve d co n cu rren tl y , an d three y ea rs o f s u p e rv is e d re le a s e f

o r e a c h c o u n t, a ls o to b e s e rv e d c o n c u rr e n tly.

II . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 9 1 a n d 1 8 U . S . C . § 3 7 4 2 . W e e m p l o y a m ixed stan d ard o f re v iew w h en co n side ri n g w h ethe r a d ef en d an t i s en ti tl ed to a d o w n w ard a d ju s tm e n t a s a m in o r p a rt ic ip a n t. U n itedS ta tes v . Isa za -Za

p a ta , 148 F. 3d 236, 237 ( 3d C ir. 1 9 9 8 ). W h e n th e D istric t C o u rt’s d e n ial o f a d o w n w a rd d e p a rtu re is b a se d p rim a rily o n a le g a l in te rp re ta tio n o f th e S e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s , o u r r e v ie w is p le n a ry. Id . I f the D istri ct C o u rt ’s de n ial w as b ase d o n fa ctua l determ ination s, w e re v iew fo r clear e rror. I d. B ec au se w e c o n clud e b ase d u p o n the re co rd th at th e D istri ct C o u rt ’s de n ial o f S h all ’sCo n t r a r yt o S h a l l ’ s c o n t e n t i o n o t h e r wi s e , t h i s c a s e i s d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m 1 Isa za -Za p a ta , 148 F. 3d at238, and U ni t ed Stat es v. R odr iguez , 342 F. 3d 296, 297- 98 ( 3d C i r . 2003) , beca us e i n bot h of thos e ca s es w e w er e unabl e t o det erm i ne the bas i s of the d i s t r i c tc o u r t ’ s ru l i n g a n d t h e s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w t o a p p l y. 5 m ot i on fordow nw ar d adj us t m entr es t ed upon fa ctual det erm i nat i ons , w e w i l l r evi ew for clea r error. 1 Shal l ’ s s ol e cont ent i on on appea l i s t hatt he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d notconducta pr oper a n a ly sis in d e n y in g h e r a d o w n w a rd a d ju stm e n t. S h e f

a u lts th e D istric t C o u rt f o r f a ili n g to conductan ana l y s i s of the fa ct or s s etfor t h i n U ni t ed Stat es v. Headl ey , 923 F. 2d 1079, 1084 ( 3d C i r . 1991) , and forfai l i ng t o m ake e xpr es s fi ndi ngs of fa ctconce r ni ng her c u lp a b ility re la tiv e to th e c u lp a b ility o f th e o th e r p a rt ic ip a n ts . I n H eadl ey , w e d e lin e a ted a se t o f f a c to rs f o r th e d istric t co u rt to c o n sid e r in d e ter m in in g w h e th e r a d e f e n d a n t sh o u ld b e c o n sid e re d a m in o r p a rticip a n t in a n o f f e n se : “[T] he cul pabi l i t yof a de fenda ntcour i erm us tdepend ne ces s ar i l yon s uch fa ct or s as t he natur e of the def

endant ’ s r el at i ons hi p t o ot herpar t i ci pant s , t he i m por t ance of the defe ndant ’ s act i ons t o t he s ucce s s of the ventur e, and the def endant ’ s aw ar enes s of the natur e and s cope of

t he cr i m i nal ent erpr i s e. ” Id . ( quot i ng U n itedS ta tes v . G a rc ia , 920 F. 2d 153, 155 ( 2d C i r . 1990) ) . T he di s t r i ctcour tneed not , how ever , expl i ci t l yw ei gh t he fac t or s s etfor t h i n Headl ey , a lth o u g h th e re c o rd s h o u ld s u p p o rt its d e c is io n . See U ni t ed Stat es v. C arr , 25 F. 3d 1194, 1208 ( 3d C i r . 1994) ( aff i r m i ng s ent ence even though “the di s t r i ctcour tdi d nots peci fi cal l yfol l ow t he cour s e s etouti n H eadl ey ” b ec au se “ the re co rd6

ampl ys uppor t [ed] t he di s t r i ctcour t ’ s concl us i on t hat[the def endant ] w as nota mi nor p arti cipa n t”). A l t hough t he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d notexpr es s l ycons i dert he Headl ey f a c to rs in th is cas e, w e conc l ude thatt he r ecor d s uppor t s i t s deni al of a dow nw ar d adj us t m entbas ed upon an appl i cat i on of thos e fa ct or s . Fi r s t , Shal l had a pe r s onal r el at i ons hi p w i t h Sager and knew t he i dent i t i es of the tw o N ew J er s eyfi r earm s buy er s . A s t he governm ent i ndi cat ed att he s ent enci ng hear i ng, Shal l w as abl e t o pr ovi de A T F agent s w i t h det ai l ed in f o rm a tio n a b o u t th e f

ire a rm s b u y e rs, in c lu d in g a p h y sic a l d e sc rip tio n o f th e m , the ir lo c a tio n , an d a d e sc rip tio n o f th e ir v e h icle s. In a d d iti o n , o n a t lea st th re e o c c a sio n s, S h a ll ac co m p an ied S ag er to N ew Jerse yto d eli v er the firearm s to the b u y ers. Se co n d , S h all ’s act i ons w er e cr i t i cal t o t he s ucce s s of the fi r earm s ventur e. She w as t he s ol e pur chas erof t he tw enty - t hr ee f

i r earm s , and foreac h t r ans act i on, s i gned the A T F for m r epr es ent i ng t hat s he w as t he ac tual pur chas erof the fi r earm s . T hi r d, and fi nal l y , Shal l w as aw ar e thats he w as pur chas i ng fi r earm s on behal f of other s i n excha nge form oneyand thatherconduct w as unl aw ful . B as ed upon thes e ci r cumst ance s , w e ca nnotconcl ude thatt he D i s t r i ct C o u rt c le a rl ye rr e d in d e n y in g S h a ll’ s m o tio n f o r a d o w n w a rd d e p a rt u re . See C arr , 25 F .3 d a t 1 2 0 8 . F o r t h e f o re g o in g re a s o n s , th e ju d g m e n t o f th e D is tr ic t C o u rt e n te re d o n M a y1 2 , 2006 w i l l be af

fi r m ed.