Opinion ID: 698179
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: plata's leadership role

Text: 6 This court reviews for clear error any factual finding that underlies the district court's sentencing decision, including whether the defendant was an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor of the offense. Monroe, 943 F.2d at 1019. The facts of the case clearly establish that Plata was a supervisor over co-defendant Keith Darnell. 7 First, Plata admitted to his probation officer that he recruited Darnell to assist him in the cultivation of marijuana under his direction. This admission was corroborated by Darnell, who explained in an interview with DEA agents that Plata had been trying to grow marijuana long before Darnell began to help. See United States v. Koenig, 952 F.2d 267, 274 (9th Cir.1991). 8 Furthermore, Plata exercised significant control over the assets of the marijuana cultivation. A defendant may be considered to be a leader or a supervisor if he exercised management responsibility over the property, assets, or activities of a criminal organization. See United States v. Castro, 972 F.2d 1107, 1113 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 1350 (1993). While Plata admitted that he had expected a $200,000 to $300,000 profit from the marijuana cultivation, he paid Darnell only $28,430. The gross disparity between Darnell's income and Plata's expected profit indicates that Plata was a supervisor and that Darnell was only a hired hand in the operation. Id. Accordingly, we hold that the district court did not commit clear error in finding that Plata was a leader in the offense. 9 AFFIRMED.