FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT AUGUST 30, 2005 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. 04- 16604 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C. Do c k e tNo . 0 4 - 8 0 0 0 2 - CR - KLR 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 J A M E S A L B E R T J A C K S O N , 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 S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A u gu s t 30, 2005) B efo re T JO F L A T , D U B IN A an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: J a m e s A l be r tJ a c ks on appe a l s hi s 100- m onth s e nt e nc e of i m pr i s onm e ntf

or2

c ons pi r a c y t o pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e c oc a i ne a nd a tt e m pt e d c oc a i ne pos s e s s i on. J a c ks on r a i s e s tw o gr ounds f orhi s appe a l : f

i r s t , he a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr one ous l y de ni e d hi m a r e duc t i on i n hi s s e nt e nc e f orpl a y i ng a m in o rr o le in th e c r im e ; a n d s e c o n d , J a c k s o n a r g u e s th a t h is s e n te n c in g w a s ille g a l, unde rU ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . ___, 125 S . C t . 738 ( 2005) . A l though J a c k s o n ’s f

ir s t a r g u m e n t f

a ils , b e c a u s e th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t c le a r ly e rrw h e n it de ni e d hi m the s e nt e nc e a dj us tm e ntba s e d on hi s r ol e i n the of f e ns e , J a c ks on succ ee ds on hi s s ec on d argum ent . T he di stri ctcourtcom m i tt ed st atut ory e rr or, u n d erB o o k er , an d th e g o v er n m en t h as co n ce d ed th at th e e rr o r in Ja ck so n ’s s e nt e nc i ng w a s ha r m f

ul . W e , the r e f

or e , va c a t e J a c ks on’ s s e nt e nc e a nd r e m a nd f or r e s e n te n c in g u n d e ra n a d v is o ry G u id e lin e s s c h e m e . A j ury c onvi c t e d J a c ks on of c ons pi r a c y t o pos s e s a tl e a s tf i ve ki l ogr a m s of c o c a i n e w i th i n t e n tt o d i s tr i b u t e a n d a tt e mp t e d p o s s e s s i o n o f a tl e a s tf i v e k i l o g r a ms of c oc a i ne . J a c ks on obj e c t e d t o the P S I pr e pa r e d i n the di s tr i c tc our ton the f o llo w in g th r e e g r o u n d s : J a c k s o n c o n te n d e d th a t h e w a s e n title d to a d ju s tm e n ts ba s e d on hi s r ol e i n the of f e ns e a nd hi s a c c e pt a nc e of r e s pons i bi l i ty , a nd J a c ks on ar gu ed that , un der B l akel y v. W as hi ng t on , 54 2 U . S . ___, 12 4 S . C t . 25 31 (200 4), he w a s e nt i t l e d t o a di f

f e r e ntba s e of

f e ns e l e ve l be c a us e the j ur y di d notf i nd the q u a n tity o f

d ru g s f o rw h ic h h e w a s r e s p o n s ib le b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b le d o u b t.3

A tJ a c ks on’ s s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng, the di s tr i c tc our tgr a nt e d a n a dj us tm e nt un der the “ sa fe ty val ve” provi si on of se ct i on 5C 1. 2 o f the G ui del i nes. T he di stri ct c our ta l s o gr a nt e d a n a dj us tm e nt , unde rs e c t i on 5K 1. 1, be c a us e the gove rnm e nt a gr e e d tha tJ a c ks on ha d s ubs t a nt i a l l y a s s i s t e d the gove rnm e nti n pr os e c ut i ng unr e l a t e d c r i m i na l a c t i vi ty . T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d nota c c e ptJ a c ks on’ s a r gum e nt re g ar d in g h is ac ce p tan ce o f r es p o n sib il ity, an d th e d istrict co u rt re jected Ja ck so n ’s c o n te n tio n th a t h e p la y e d o n ly a m in o rr o le in th e o f f e n s e . R egar di ng Ja ckson’ s B l akel y a rgum ent , the di stri ctcourtst at ed thati tw as bound t o appl y the G ui de l i ne s a s m a nda t or y . T he j udge s t a t e d tha tthe pe opl e w ho had com e t o sup po rtJa ckson and w ri tt en l ett er s on h i s behal f s ho ul d b e a w ar e that the c our tc oul d not“

j us ts e nt e nc e t o a ny a r e a tha tI f e e l l i ke , a nd I c a n’ t . ” T he j udge s t a t e d tha the w a s “ r e s tr i c t e d by l a w t o c e r t a i n s e nt e nc e s . S o . . . , I hope c ouns e l ha s a dvi s e d y ou tha tI don’ tha ve unl i m i t e d di s c r e t i on t o s e nt e nc e i n a ny part i cul arar ea . ” T he j ud ge al so st at ed, “ B as ed on [J ac kson ’ s] l ac k o f c ri m i nal hi s t ory , a s e nt e nc e w i l l be i m pos e d a tthe l ow e nd of the [ G ] ui de l i ne r a nge . ” T he di s tr i c tc our tthe n s e tJ a c ks on’ s appl i c a bl e G ui de l i ne r a nge f orhi s s e nt e nc e a t151 t o 188 m onths . T he di s tr i c tc our tr e duc e d J a c ks on’ s e nt e nc e by one - thi r d, t o 100 m on ths, because of hi s a ss i st ance t o the go vernm ent . T he di stri ctcourtal so st at ed that , “ [i ] n the eventthatthe S up re m e C ou rt ” dec i ded i n B oo ker thatthe di stri ct4

courtcoul d n ot“ consi der the am ou ntof drug s, ” then Jac kson ’ s a l t ernat i ve se nt ence w o u ld b e 8 0 m o n th s in p r is o n . J a c ks on a r gue s on appe a l tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d w he n i tde ni e d J a c ks on a n a d ju s tm e n t b a s e d o n h is r o le in th e o f f e n s e , w h ic h J a c k s o n c o n te n d s w a s m in o r . W e r e vi e w tha tde c i s i on f orc l e a re rr or . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R odr i gue z D e V a r on, 175 F . 3d 930, 937 ( 11th C i r . 1999) . “ [ T ] he di s tr i c tc our t ’ s ul t i m a t e de t e r m i na t i on of the defendant ’ s r ol e i n the offens e s ho ul d b e i nform ed by tw o p ri nci pl es di sc erned fr om the G ui del i nes: fi rs t , the defendant ’ s r ol e i n the re l evantcond uctfor w hi ch [he] has bee n h el d acc ou nt abl e a tse nt enci ng , and, se cond , [hi s] rol e a s c om pare d t o tha tof othe rpa r t i c i pa nt s i n [ hi s ] r e l e va ntc onduc t . ” I d. a t940. “ [ A ] de f e nda nt i s notaut om at i ca l l y e nt i t l ed t o a m i no r r ol e a dj ustm entm er el y bec ause [he] w as s o me w h a tl e s s c u l p a b l e th a n th e o th e rd i s c e rn a b l e p a r t i c i p a n t s . ” I d . a t9 4 4 . “ So l on g as the basi s of the tri al court ’ s dec i si on i s s up po rt ed by the re cord and d oes no ti nv ol ve a m i sapp l i ca t i on of a rul e of l aw , w e bel i eve thati tw i l l be ra re for a n ap p e lla te c o u r t to c o n c lu d e th a t th e s e n te n c in g c o u r t’s d e te r m in a tio n is c le a r ly e rr one ous . ” I d. a t945. J a c ks on’ s a r gum e ntf

a i l s a s t o both of

the D e V a r on f

a c t or s . R e ga r di ng the fi rs tfa ct or, Ja ckson w as hel d acc ou nt abl e a tse nt enci ng for hi s i nv ol vem enti n at le a s t tw o d ru g tr a n s a c tio n s f o ra to ta l o f

a t le a s t 1 2 0 k ilo g r a m s o f c o c a in e a n d f

if ty5

pounds of

m a r i j ua na . J a c ks on pr ovi de d e s s e nt i a l s e c ur i ty s e r vi c e s a nd tran sp o rtatio n th at fa cili tated th es e d ru g tran sa ctio n s. W ith o u t Jac k so n ’s a s s is ta n c e , th e d ru g b u y s c o u ld p o te n tia lly h a v e f a ile d . R e ga r di ng the s e c ond f

a c t or , J a c ks on he l pe d c ountm one y r e l a t e d t o a drug deal , Ja ckson p rovi ded sec uri ty f or drug deal s, and Jac kson kn ow i ng l y part i ci pat ed in e v e ry d e a l in w h ic h h e w a s in v o lv e d . J a c k s o n a n d a n o th e rd e f e n d a n t w e r e to spl i tthe proceeds of the drug tra nsac t i on s e venl y. W e c anno tsa y thatthe di stri ct c our tc l e a r l y e rr e d w he n i tde t e r m i ne d tha tJ a c ks on’ s r ol e i n the of f e ns e w a s not m i no r. W e ne xtturn t o J a c ks on’ s B ooke ra r gum e nt , w hi c h he pr e s e r ve d i n the d istrict co u rt. “ W h er e th er e is a ti m ely o b jectio n , w e r ev iew th e d ef en d an t’ s B oo ker c l ai m i n o rdert o d et erm i ne w hether the error w as harm l es s. ” U ni t ed S t at es v. M a the ni a , 409 F . 3d 1289, 1291 ( 11th C i r . 2005) . J a c ks on m a ke s both a c o n s titu tio n a l a n d a s ta tu to ry a r g u m e n t r e g a r d in g B o o k e re rr o r .

“ [ C ] ons t i tut i ona l e rr ori s the us e of e xtr a - ve r di c te nha nc e m e nt s t o r e a c h a [ G ] ui de l i ne s r e s ul ttha ti s bi ndi ng on the s e nt e nc i ng j udge ; the e rr ori s i n the m andat ory nature of the [G ] ui del i nes once the [G ] ui del i nes r ange has been d e te r m in e d .” U n ite d S ta te s v . R o d r ig u e z , 3 9 8 F .3 d 1 2 9 1 , 1 3 0 0 ( 1 1 th C ir .2 0 0 5 ) ) . In B o o k er, th e S u p rem e C o u rtreaffirm ed i t s h o l d i n g i n A p p ren d i v . N ew Jersey,6

530 U . S . 466, 120 S . C t . 2348 ( 2000) : “ A ny f a c t( othe rtha n a pr i orc onvi c t i on) w hi c h i s ne c e s s a ry t o s uppor ta s e nt e nc e e xc e e di ng the m a xi m um a uthor i z e d by the f a c t s e s t a bl i s he d by a pl e a of gui l ty ora j ur y ve r di c tm us tbe a dm i tt e d by the defe nd antor prov ed t o a j ury bey on d a re as on abl e dou bt . ” B oo ker, 12 5 S . C t . at 756. T he s t a nda r d f

orc ons t i tut i ona l e rr orr e qui r e s the gove rnm e ntt o s how “b ey o n d a r ea so n ab le d o u b t, th at th e e rr o r d id n o t co n trib u te to th e d ef en d an t’ s u ltim a te s e n te n c e .” M a th e n ia , 4 0 9 F .3 d a t 1 2 9 1 - 9 2 . B e c a u s e J a c k s o n s tip u la te d to a drug qua nt i ty tha tm a de hi m e l i gi bl e f orthe s e nt e nc e he r e c e i ve d, the r e w a s no B ooke rc ons t i tut i ona l e rr or . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S a nc he z , 269 F . 3d 1250, 1271 n. 40 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) ( e n b a n c ) . S t atut ory e rr or occurs w hen a di stri ctcourtse nt ence s adefe nd ant“ un der a m a nda t ory G ui de l i ne s s c he m e , e ve n i n the a bs e nc e of a S i xth A m e ndm e nt e n h a n c e m e n t v io la tio n .” U n ite d S ta te s v . S h e lto n , 4 0 0 F .3 d 1 3 2 5 , 1 3 3 0 - 3 1 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2005) . T he s t a nda r d f ors t a tut ory e rr orr e qui r e s us t o de t e r m i ne w he the rthe error e i ther di d n otaf

fe ctthe se nt ence or on l y had a verysl i gh tef fe ct . M atheni a, 409 F . 3d a t1292. T he s t a nda r d of r e vi e w f ors t a tut ory e rr or“ i s note a s y f orthe g o v e rn m e n t to m e e t. I t is a s d if f ic u lt f o rth e g o v e rn m e n t to m e e t th a t s ta n d a r d a s it i s f ora de f e nda ntt o m e e tthe thi r d- pr ong pr e j udi c e s t a nda r d f

orpl a i n e rr or r e v ie w .” I d .7

T he gove rnm e ntc onc e de s tha ti tc a nnotm e e ti t s bur de n i n thi s appe a l . T he s t a t e m e nt s of

the di s tr i c tc our te vi de nc e tha ti tm i ghtha ve i m pos e d a m or e l e ni e nt se nt ence had i tconsi dere d the G ui del i nes a dv i sory . A l tho ug h the di stri ctcourt m a de i t s a l t e rna t i ve s e nt e nc e c ont i nge nton a hol di ng of the S upr e m e C our ttha tthe di stri ctcourtcoul d n otconsi der drug q uant i ty, the di stri ctcourtanno un ce d an a l t e rna t i ve s e nt e nc e tha tw a s tw e nty m onths s hor t e rtha n the one i ti m pos e d on Ja ckson. W e, there fore , vaca t e J ac kson ’ s s ent ence and rem and t hi s app ea l so that the di stri ctcourtm ay re se nt ence Ja ckson u nd eran advi sory G ui del i nes r egi m e. T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t is , th e r e f o r e , AF F I RME D i n p art , bu tJa ckson’ s s ent ence i s VA C A TED a nd R EM A N D ED .