Opinion ID: 170577
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Enhancement for being a manager or supervisor

Text: U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b) provides that, [i]f the defendant was a manager or supervisor (but not an organizer or leader) and the criminal activity involved five or more participants or was otherwise extensive, his offense level should be increased three levels. A supervisor is one who exercised some degree of control over others involved in the commission of the offense or must have been responsible for organizing others for the purpose of carrying out the crime. United States v. Allemand, 34 F.3d 923, 931 (10th Cir.1994) (quotation, alteration omitted). To qualify for the enhancement, [the defendant] need only manage or supervise one participant. United States v. Gonzalez Edeza, 359 F.3d 1246, 1248 (10th Cir.2004). The question of a defendant's role in the offense is a factual question, which this court reviews for clear error. See United States v. Cruz Camacho, 137 F.3d 1220, 1223-24 (10th Cir.1998). That is true even when, as here, the defendant does not challenge the historical facts contained in the PSR but only contests the ultimate finding that the defendant was a leader, manager or supervisor. See United States v. Wilfong, 475 F.3d 1214, 1218-19 (10th Cir.2007). A finding is not clearly erroneous unless it is without factual support in the record or if, after reviewing all of the evidence, we are left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Gillman v. Ford (In re Ford), 492 F.3d 1148, 1153 (10th Cir.2007) (quotation omitted). Based upon the unobjected-to historical facts in the PSR, the district court's factual finding that Pena-Hermosillo was not a manager or supervisor was clearly erroneous. There is no dispute that Pena-Hermosillo's drug trafficking involved at least five people. Further, the PSR's facts clearly indicate that he directed others  to pick up drugs for him in Utah and Colorado, to store significant amounts of drugs for him in other people's homes and businesses, to permit him to sell drugs from these locations, to hide drugs for him during a traffic stop, and to clean house after he had been arrested. Considering all of the unobjected-to historical facts in the PSR, I am left with the definite and firm conviction that the district court made a mistake in finding that Pena-Hermosillo was not a manager or supervisor of at least one participant in the drug trafficking conspiracy. In re Ford, 492 F.3d at 1153.