Opinion ID: 727244
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Jackson, Mercury, & Minimal Participation

Text: 40 In the calculation of a defendant's base offense level for the sentencing purposes under the guidelines, the District Court considers defendant's role in the offense, which may be the basis for either an increase or a decrease in defendant's base offense level. See U.S.S.G. §§ 3B1.1, 3B1.2. In the presentence reports of Jackson and Mercury, probation officers recommended no adjustments for role in the offense. Jackson and Mercury appeal the District Court's adoption of the probation officers' recommendations with regard to their roles in the offense. We review the District Court's determinations as to defendants' roles in the offenses of conviction for clear error. United States v. Perry, 908 F.2d 56, 58 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1002, 111 S.Ct. 565, 112 L.Ed.2d 571 (1990). 41 We reject the arguments of defendants Jackson and Mercury that the District Court was clearly erroneous when it declined to decrease their offense levels on the basis of their having been minor participants in the criminal activity for which they were convicted. Such a determination is heavily dependent on the facts of the particular case. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, background comment (This section provides a range of adjustments for a defendant who plays a part in committing the offense that makes him substantially less culpable than the average participant.). 42 We agree with the District Court that the nature and length of Jackson's involvement in this conspiracy suggest his ineligibility for a mitigating role adjustment. The trial included testimony that Jackson recruited others to traffic drugs, had a couple of crack houses in 1988, dealt numerous ounces of crack in 1990, and that he received several ounces of crack in 1992. See id. 43 With regard to Mercury, the District Court found that, with approximately 347 grams of cocaine base and 245 grams of cocaine powder attributable to him and his frequent possession of firearms in connection with drug trafficking, ascribing a minor role to him was improper. The District Court found the reduction of offense level particularly inappropriate in light of the fact that the full amount of drugs possessed by others in the conspiracy were not attributed to Mercury even though such drugs were arguably within his knowledge and foreseeable to him. We agree.