Court Opinion

ID: 2964225
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:22:25.337168+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:42:52.257900
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          July 23, 1996
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1294

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                             ALEJANDRO DE JESUS GRANADA,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                  [Hon. Carmen Consuelo Cerezo, U.S. District Judge]
                                                ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Selya, Cyr and Boudin,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Irma R. Valldejuli on brief for appellant.
            __________________
            Guillermo Gil, United  States Attorney, Warren Vazquez and  Nelson
            _____________                           ______________      ______
        Perez-Sosa,  Assistant United  States Attorneys,  and Jose  A. Quiles-
        __________                                            ________________
        Espinosa, Senior Litigation Counsel, on brief for appellee.
        ________

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                      Per Curiam.  Alejandro De Jesus Granada appeals his
                      __________

            sentence on two grounds.  We affirm.

                      1.  Role in the offense.  Appellant argues that the
                          ___________________

            district  court erred in failing  to grant his  request for a

            two-level reduction in the offense level based upon his minor

            role in the offense, pursuant to U.S.S.G.    3B1.2.  The plea

            agreement   entered  between  appellant  and  the  government

            expressly provided that, beyond the adjustment for acceptance

            of responsibility, "no further adjustments to the defendant's

            base offense level  shall be  made."  It  might therefore  be

            argued  that  appellant  waived   his  right  to  request  an

            adjustment for his  role in  the offense, but  there is  some

            difference  among  the  circuits  on when  and  whether  such

            stipulations are  binding on the  district court and  we have

            not resolved  this issue.   Compare United States  v. Isirov,
                                        _______ _____________     ______

            996 F.2d 183, 186-87  (7th Cir. 1993), with United  States v.
                                                        ______________

            Long, 77 F.3d 1060, 1061 (8th Cir. 1996).
            ____

                      In all events, Granada was convicted of importing a

            specific  shipment of  heroin.   He is  the one  who  did the

            importing  and while  there is  some indication  that someone

            else furnished him with the drugs, there is almost nothing to

            indicate  that his role in this importation was minor.  Given

            that  the burden was on Granada  to show that he was entitled

            to the downward adjustment, the district court did not err in

            its conclusion that the adjustment was unwarranted.

                                         -2-

                      2.    Departure  Pursuant  to   U.S.S.G.     5K2.0.
                            ____________________________________________

            Appellant contends  that the district court  erred in failing

            to  depart downward under U.S.S.G.   5K2.0, on account of his

            substantial  assistance  to  the government,  notwithstanding

            that  the government did not move for a departure pursuant to

              5K1.1.  "It  is by now axiomatic that a  criminal defendant

            cannot ground an appeal on a sentencing court's discretionary

            decision not to depart below the guideline sentencing range."

            United States v. Pierro, 32 F.3d 611, 619 (1st Cir. 1994).  
            _____________    ______

                      In  his brief,  appellant does  not argue  that the

            district court misunderstood  its legal authority  to depart.

            The transcript  of the  sentencing hearing does  not indicate

            that  the  court  suffered   from  such  a  misunderstanding.

            Therefore,  this  court  lacks  jurisdiction  to  review  the

            sentencing court's discretionary decision not to depart.

                      3.   Pro Se Motion to  Supplement Appellate Record.
                           _____________________________________________

            Appellant  filed a pro se  motion with this  court seeking to
                               ___ __

            supplement  the  record  by adding  a  letter  from  a prison

            psychologist. In his motion, Granada suggests that the letter

            calls into question  the validity  of his guilty  plea.   The

            letter  was never before the district court.  Nor has Granada

            raised  the issue  of  the validity  of  his guilty  plea  in

            district court.   "It is a bedrock rule that when a party has

            not  presented an argument to the district court, she may not

                                         -3-

            unveil it in the court of appeals."  United  States v. Slade,
                                                 ______________    _____

            980 F.2d 27, 30 (1st Cir. 1992).

                      Appellant's sentence is affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1.
                                              ________  ___

            Appellant's pro se motion to supplement the record on  appeal
                        ___ __

            is denied.
               ______

                                         -4-