Opinion ID: 676427
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Bringas-Beltran's appeal.

Text: 20 It is a close question whether the district court made a finding of fact on whether Bringas conspired to sell ten kilos or two. We cannot simply infer from the sentence an entirely unstated finding. The district judge must first make the factual determinations, then apply the sentencing guidelines to see what sentence is required on those facts. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(c)(3)(D) requires a district court to make a finding on every factual dispute relevant to sentencing. The district court satisfies the above requirement by adopting the conclusions in the PSR. United States v. Rosales, 917 F.2d 1220, 1222 (9th Cir.1990). The district judge did not say expressly whether Bringas conspired to sell ten kilos or two. He just said I'm going to adopt the calculations of the sentencing guidelines ... [as recommended] by the probation officer, with stated exceptions. 21 The district court must make its resolution of all disputed matters clear on the record. United States v. Upshaw, 918 F.2d 789, 792 (9th Cir.1990). But we shall not remand for an empty formality if it is clear from the record that the judge must have been resolving the factual issue. Here the parties had just been arguing about whether Bringas conspired to sell ten kilos of cocaine or two. Bringas's lawyer had argued for two, the prosecutor for ten. The judge cut off the government's argument as unnecessary, saying You don't have to rehash the entire case. I heard it at trial. 22 In this context, when the judge made his terse announcement of his decision, he must have meant that based on the evidence at trial, he found that Bringas conspired to sell ten kilograms. We cannot tell this from his words alone, and the record would be better if we could. Nevertheless, when the judge's words are considered in context, he must have been deciding on the ten or two kilo issue. That is what the lawyers had just been arguing about. 23 The judge's attribution of a ten kilo conspiracy to Bringas was not clearly erroneous. Bringas's own remark to the DEA undercover agent as they left the restaurant was evidence of a ten kilogram conspiracy. Agent McConnell testified about a conversation with Bringas: He goes, 'After this one' he goes 'five, maybe five--no maybe ten, surely five,' some statement to that sense, where I could buy five kilos for sure if he couldn't bring the ten. The amount of money was evidence of an ability to provide about seven kilograms. Soriano said that McConnell could have gotten a big load off this guy, referring to Bringas. The judge could infer by a preponderance of the evidence that Bringas and Soriano were cooperating with regard to the ten kilo negotiation. 24 We do not determine whether the record supported an upward departure on Bringas, because the district court did not depart. His sentence of 120 months was reached by applying the guidelines, based on the probation officer's calculation for a ten kilo conspiracy. It was not a departure. 25 AFFIRMED.