Opinion ID: 604198
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Chan's Role in the Offense

Text: 54 Finally, Chan argues that the district court erred by increasing his base offense level by two for his aggravating role as an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor of the heroin conspiracy under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c). To justify a two-level increase under § 3B1.1(c), the government must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant had an aggravating role in the offense. See United States v. Mares-Molina, 913 F.2d 770, 773 (9th Cir.1990). Whether a defendant was an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor is a question of fact that is reviewed for clear error. Id. 55 In Mares-Molina, this court adopted a First Circuit holding that for an upward adjustment under § 3B1.1  'the defendant must have exercised some control over others involved in the commission of the offense or he must have been responsible for organizing others for the purpose of carrying out the crime.'  Id. (quoting United States v. Fuller, 897 F.2d 1217, 1220 (1st Cir.1990)). Applying this standard to a defendant who knowingly leased his warehouse to individuals who used it to store cocaine, we held that the district court's finding that the defendant was an organizer or manager was clearly erroneous. Id. 913 F.2d at 774; see also United States v. Koenig, 952 F.2d 267, 274 (9th Cir.1991) (applying Mares-Molina standard, defendant was manager because there was evidence that he played some role in directing coconspirators). Although several cases after Mares-Molina have upheld the two-level upward adjustment without explicitly applying the control over others standard, all such cases arguably met this test. See, e.g., United States v. Schubert, 957 F.2d 694, 696 (9th Cir.1992) (defendant was organizer because he provided business associate with money to purchase drugs); United States v. Hernandez, 952 F.2d 1110, 1119 (9th Cir.1991) (defendant was manager because he recruited, hired, and instructed workers in counterfeiting scheme), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 334, 121 L.Ed.2d 252 (1992). 56 We do not believe that the district court, properly applying the Mares-Molina standard, could have found by a preponderance of the evidence that Chan was an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor under § 3B1.1(c). At sentencing the government argued that the two-level increase was justified because Chan opened the trading company to export the heroin, reserved a shipping date and arranged for a shipping container, assisted Leung in placing the heroin in the cans and loading the shipping container, was promised $50,000-$70,000 by Leung if the shipment was successful, and at the time of his arrest possessed the rental contract and keys for the packing warehouse. While all of these facts suggest that Chan was perhaps one of the more culpable defendants, they do not indicate that he exercised control over others or was responsible for organizing others so as to justify an increase under § 3B1.1(c). Moreover, the court justified the two-level increase by stating: [Chan] didn't organize the whole scenario ... I mean, it seems that Mr. Leung did that.... But [Chan] implemented the importation and in that, utilized organization skills. Organizing the importation, however, is not the same as organizing other conspirators and does not satisfy Mares-Molina. 57 Because no evidence indicated that Chan exercised control over other defendants or was responsible for organizing them, 8 Mares-Molina requires us to hold that the district court's finding that Chan was an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor was clearly erroneous. We therefore vacate Chan's sentence and remand for resentencing in accordance with this opinion. 58 AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED IN PART.