Opinion ID: 196561
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Evidence from Co-Defendant's Trial

Text: 6 Peguero's third argument on appeal is that the sentencing court impermissibly referenced and in fact utilized evidence of Appellant's alleged leadership role in the charged offenses which were brought out in the trial of a co-defendant [Marcelino Enrique Adames-Santos] in an entirely separate proceeding. Peguero, relying upon United States v. Berzon, 941 F.2d 8, 17 (1st Cir.1991), requests that the sentence be vacated and his case remanded for resentencing without consideration of evidence obtained in the Adames-Santos trial. 7 Peguero made no objection at the time of sentencing, when the court referred to the conclusions it had drawn based on the evidence at co-defendant's trial. If Peguero was concerned that the information would influence his sentence, he ought to have requested a copy of the trial transcript and sought a continuance of his sentencing hearing so that he could prepare a rebuttal to the information contained therein. Having failed to raise these contentions before the sentencing court, they may not be raised for the first time on appeal. United States v. Jackson, 3 F.3d 506, 511 (1st Cir.1993). In any event, it is clear that Peguero was not prejudiced. The court did not impose an upward adjustment for a leadership role (despite its conclusion that Peguero was a leader) and it sentenced him to the minimum guideline sentence. As Peguero has identified no permissible basis for a downward departure, he was not prejudiced by the sentencing judge's knowledge of the evidence received at the co-defendant's trial.