Opinion ID: 689595
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Challenge of the Defendant Salvador Fuentes to his sentence.

Text: 29 The defendant Fuentes challenges the guideline calculations in connection with his sentence to a term of imprisonment of seventy-eight months. The district court found that the amount of cocaine attributable to Fuentes was in excess of 500 grams and less than 2 kilograms and fixed the offense level at 26 in accordance with the sentencing table. Two levels were added for the use of a firearm. Fuentes filed timely objections to the amount of cocaine attributable to him and the addition of the two levels for the use of a firearm. He also contended that he should have received a reduction of two levels for being only a minimal participant in the conspiracy.
30 The district court, consistent with the Pre-Sentence Report, found that the amount of cocaine attributable to Fuentes was 1.82 kilograms. Fuentes objected and argued that the amount was less than 500 grams, i.e. 396 grams and thus the offense level should be 22. (See Appendix, page 293.) 31 The defendant Fuentes is unable to demonstrate that the factual finding of the district court was clearly erroneous. The district court observed that documentary evidence demonstrated that the cocaine attributable to Fuentes exceeded 500 grams and the testimonial evidence, which included the testimony of Julio Jorge Cantillo that the district court found to be credible, indicated that Fuentes had a kilogram of cocaine stored at this his home during the conspiracy. 32 After hearing out Fuentes' counsel during the sentencing hearing, the district court declared: 33 Well, I understand what you're saying, Mr. Phelan. The court is going to give credit to the testimony of the witness, and the witness testified that one kilogram of cocaine was found at--was secured from the residence of Mr. Fuentes. In addition thereto, the drug records are in evidence, the Court gives credit to those records. And the court is of the opinion that independently of the drug records your client falls within the range, and independently of the testimony your client falls within the range he's being charged with. And the combination of the two, he's surely within that range. So the court finds that it is reasonable to charge your client with 1.82 kilograms of cocaine. (Joint Appendix, page 302). 34 Our review of the record clearly demonstrates the existence of evidence and testimony that supports the district court's findings. The defendant's reliance on United States v. Robinson, 898 F.2d 1111, 1115-16 (6th Cir.1990) is misplaced. 35 In Robinson, the witness on whom the district court relied for determining the quantity of the drugs involved was found, on appellate review, to be unreliable. Fuentes argues that because one of the defendants was acquitted in a trial setting where there was an absence of drug record documentation, the testimony of the witness on whom the district court relied should be discounted and declared not sufficiently reliable or credible to support the district court's factual finding. We find neither the district court's credibility determination as to the witness Julio Jorge Cantillo nor the district court's reliance on the drug records maintained by Maria Ramirez-Cantillo to be clearly erroneous. Cf. United States v. Nelson, 922 F.2d 311, 315-316 (6th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 981 (1991); United States v. Clemons, 999 F.2d 154, 156 (6th Cir.1993), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 114 S.Ct. 704 (1994). Consequently, the challenge of Fuentes as to the amount of cocaine attributable to him fails. 36
37 The district court enhanced the offense level by two levels because of the determination that Fuentes had displayed a firearm during the conspiracy in connection with the collection of a drug debt as testified to by Julio Jorge Cantillo, an unindicted member of the conspiracy. Cantillo related the firearm incident during cross-examination. U.S.S.G. Sec. 2D1.1(b)(1) provides for the enhancement of the offense level by two if a firearm was possessed during the conspiracy. Fuentes argues that the district court erred in the enhancement because the testimony of Cantillo was unsupported in any way. Again, the district court made a specific finding as to the credibility of Cantillo as he stated: 38 Well, the Court recalls that testimony, and that incident happened in connection with this conspiracy. It involved the collection of a drug debt, and a gun was drawn, according to the testimony, the sworn testimony that's on the record. The jury apparently found credible Mr. Cantillo's testimony regarding other matters. The court heard that testimony, and the Court heard the testimony regarding the handgun. The court believes that testimony credible, and the Court believes that the additional two-point enhancement is appropriate. (See, Joint Appendix, page 304) 39 The defendant's challenge to the enhancement for possession of a firearm during the conspiracy is denied. 40
41 The cocaine conspiracy involved 14 persons according to the government. The issue raised by Fuentes is anchored in the proposition that he was entitled to a two level reduction as a minor participant in the context of U.S.S.G. Sec. 3B1.2. Fuentes makes the claim based on the amount of cocaine attributable to him in comparison with the co-conspirators. He limits the comparison to the other nine defendants, Arturo Arsenio Guillot (15 to 50 kilograms), Ivan Lozano (15 to 50 kilograms), Ramon Paula Castro (15 to 50 kilograms, Santos Peinado (3.73 kilograms), Julio Villego (3.5 kilograms), Manuel Barajas (3.4 kilograms), Armando Williams (3 kilograms), David Bernal (1.35 kilograms), and Wilfredo Rodriguez (14.16 grams) and concludes that because only 1.82 kilograms of cocaine was attributed to him, he was less culpable than all but two of the persons associated with the criminal drug conspiracy. The government's brief in support of the district court's findings concedes that Fuentes was less culpable than co-defendants Guillot, Lozano and Castro as they were involved in supplying the cocaine from Miami to Julio Jorge Cantillo, but argues that the convicted co-defendants Peinado, Barajas, Williams, Bernal and Rodriguez were cocaine distributors for Cantillo as was the defendant Fuentes. The cocaine attributable to the cocaine distributors for Cantillo ranged from 3.73 kilograms to 14.16 grams. In denying Fuentes' claim for a two level reduction as a minor participant the district court declared: 42 And the commentary says that this section provides a range of adjustments for a defendant who plays a part in committing the offense and makes him substantially less culpable than the average participant. The word is substantially. In this particular case the drug records show he's involved to the tune of $30,000, plus the additional cocaine, the kilogram. Plus we have the testimony of him packing a handgun in connection with this drug transaction. That doesn't make him substantially less culpable. The court's going to deny your request for a two point reduction. (See, Joint Appendix, page 306). 43 The district court's denial of Fuentes' request for a two level reduction as a minor participant was not clearly erroneous. 44 In sum, we find that the sentence of Fuentes was carefully considered by the district court and is not clearly erroneous in any respect. Therefore, the conviction and sentence of defendant-appellant Fuentes is AFFIRMED.