Opinion ID: 714124
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Adjustments for Defendants' Roles in the Conspiracy

Text: 55 Thomas Brown, Sr., Ysidro Castillo, and David Castillo argue that the district court erred when it upwardly adjusted their respective sentences to reflect their organizational or leadership roles in the conspiracy. At sentencing, the court adopted the recommendations made in the presentence investigation reports (PSRs) prepared for Thomas Brown, Sr. and Ysidro Castillo and increased their respective base offense levels by four levels pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a); the court thereby concluded that Thomas Brown, Sr. and Ysidro Castillo were--as stated in their PSRs--organizer[s] or leader[s] of a criminal activity that involved five or more participants or [ ] otherwise extensive. Concluding, however, that David Castillo was a manager or supervisor (but not an organizer or leader) pursuant to § 3B1.1, the court departed from the recommendation made in David Castillo's PSR and increased his base offense level by only three levels. 56 We review the district court's findings in this context for clear error. United States v. Narvaez, 38 F.3d 162, 166 (5th Cir.1994), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 1803, 131 L.Ed.2d 729 (1995). In addition to Ballard's testimony regarding the roles of these defendants, supra, the district court considered the following information from the PSRs of these defendants: (1) Thomas Brown, Sr. participated in the decision to hire Ballard, instructed Ballard regarding when to make trips to Texas, served as Ballard's principal contact upon Ballard's return from Texas with marihuana, gave Ballard instructions as to what to do with the marihuana, and funded an attempt to purchase two hundred pounds of marihuana from a third party in Houston, Texas; (2) Ysidro Castillo was the leader of the organization in Texas, also storing marihuana in his home and assisting in the loading of marihuana; (3) David Castillo was one of the leaders of the Dallas organization, relaying instructions to Ballard, generally assisting Ysidro Castillo, and also participating in the loading of marihuana. 22 In light of the evidence before the district court, the court's findings were not clearly erroneous. 57 Michael Castillo argues that the district court's refusal to depart downwardly two levels from his base offense level--pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b)--in consideration of his professed minor participation in the conspiracy constituted clear error. However, in United States v. Tremelling, 43 F.3d 148 (5th Cir.1995), this Court held that a district court should not make an adjustment for minor participation merely because the defendant's participation is somewhat less than the other participants'; to warrant such a downward adjustment, the defendant's participation must be enough less so that he at best was peripheral to the advancement of the illicit activity. Id. at 153. In Tremelling, we held that the defendant's actions in bringing the buyers and sellers together for the transaction were not peripheral so as to merit a downward departure. Id. Therefore, considering the evidence of Michael Castillo's participation in this conspiracy, 23 the district court's decision not to make a downward adjustment was not clearly erroneous. 58