Opinion ID: 689595
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Cocaine Attributable to Fuentes

Text: 30 The district court, consistent with the Pre-Sentence Report, found that the amount of cocaine attributable to Fuentes was 1.82 kilograms. Fuentes objected and argued that the amount was less than 500 grams, i.e. 396 grams and thus the offense level should be 22. (See Appendix, page 293.) 31 The defendant Fuentes is unable to demonstrate that the factual finding of the district court was clearly erroneous. The district court observed that documentary evidence demonstrated that the cocaine attributable to Fuentes exceeded 500 grams and the testimonial evidence, which included the testimony of Julio Jorge Cantillo that the district court found to be credible, indicated that Fuentes had a kilogram of cocaine stored at this his home during the conspiracy. 32 After hearing out Fuentes' counsel during the sentencing hearing, the district court declared: 33 Well, I understand what you're saying, Mr. Phelan. The court is going to give credit to the testimony of the witness, and the witness testified that one kilogram of cocaine was found at--was secured from the residence of Mr. Fuentes. In addition thereto, the drug records are in evidence, the Court gives credit to those records. And the court is of the opinion that independently of the drug records your client falls within the range, and independently of the testimony your client falls within the range he's being charged with. And the combination of the two, he's surely within that range. So the court finds that it is reasonable to charge your client with 1.82 kilograms of cocaine. (Joint Appendix, page 302). 34 Our review of the record clearly demonstrates the existence of evidence and testimony that supports the district court's findings. The defendant's reliance on United States v. Robinson, 898 F.2d 1111, 1115-16 (6th Cir.1990) is misplaced. 35 In Robinson, the witness on whom the district court relied for determining the quantity of the drugs involved was found, on appellate review, to be unreliable. Fuentes argues that because one of the defendants was acquitted in a trial setting where there was an absence of drug record documentation, the testimony of the witness on whom the district court relied should be discounted and declared not sufficiently reliable or credible to support the district court's factual finding. We find neither the district court's credibility determination as to the witness Julio Jorge Cantillo nor the district court's reliance on the drug records maintained by Maria Ramirez-Cantillo to be clearly erroneous. Cf. United States v. Nelson, 922 F.2d 311, 315-316 (6th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 981 (1991); United States v. Clemons, 999 F.2d 154, 156 (6th Cir.1993), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 114 S.Ct. 704 (1994). Consequently, the challenge of Fuentes as to the amount of cocaine attributable to him fails. 36