Opinion ID: 735402
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Rivera-Rosa's Active Participation

Text: 45 Rivera-Rosa also takes issue with the district court's conclusion that the shipment of the 3.4 kilograms of heroin was known to or reasonably foreseeable to him. The reviewing court shall accept the findings of fact of the district court unless they are clearly erroneous.... 18 U.S.C. § 3742(e). A finding of fact is clearly erroneous only if, after reviewing all the evidence, the appellate court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 573, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 1511, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985). Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, the fact-finder's choice between them cannot be clearly erroneous. Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 369, 111 S.Ct. 1859, 1871-72, 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991). Moreover, in reviewing whether the facts supported a district court's findings, the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the Government. United States v. Paccione, 949 F.2d 1183, 1208 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 505 U.S. 1220, 112 S.Ct. 3029, 120 L.Ed.2d 900 (1992). Finally, where the district court's findings are based on the testimony of witnesses, they are entitled to special deference. United States v. Beverly, 5 F.3d 633, 642 (2d Cir.1993). 46 At sentencing, the district court rejected Rivera-Rosa's argument that his role in the conspiracy was limited to that of a buyer of one kilogram of heroin. The district court found that Rivera-Rosa agreed to and did oversee two of the couriers as they flew from the Dominican Republic to Puerto Rico with the approximately four kilograms of heroin strapped to their bodies. The district court also found that Rivera-Rosa was in effect, the courier of the couriers, and that he associated himself with the four kilogram venture, facilitated it, and that then became the scope of his agreement even though he only wanted one of those four kilograms. In light of this record and viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, we are not left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. Thus, we conclude that the district court's determination that the approximately four kilograms of heroin were known to or reasonably foreseeable to Rivera-Rosa was not clearly erroneous.