UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-4804
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LUIS ALBERTO VILLAREAL-MARRERO, a/k/a Gordo Cacheton, a/k/a
Weez,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson,
District Judge. (4:13-cr-00048-RAJ-DEM-1)
Submitted: April 22, 2014 Decided: June 2, 2014
Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael S. Nachmanoff, Federal Public Defender, Richard J.
Colgan, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Nicholas J. Xenakis,
Research & Writing Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant.
Dana J. Boente, Acting United States Attorney, Eric M. Hurt,
Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Luis Alberto Villareal-Marrero appeals the 216-month
sentence imposed by the district court following his guilty plea
to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to
distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846 (2012). On appeal,
Villareal-Marrero argues that the district court erred by
applying a four-level enhancement under U.S. Sentencing
Guidelines Manual (“USSG”) § 3B1.1(a) (2012) for his role as an
organizer or leader of the criminal activity. After careful
review of the record, we affirm.
The district court’s determination that a defendant is
an organizer or leader in the offense is a factual finding
reviewed for clear error. United States v. Thorson, 633 F.3d
312, 317 (4th Cir. 2011). To qualify for a four-level increase,
a defendant must have been “an organizer or leader of a criminal
activity that involved five or more participants or was
otherwise extensive.” USSG § 3B1.1(a). Factors that
distinguish an organizational or leadership role from lesser
roles include:
the exercise of decision making authority, the nature
of participation in the commission of the offense, the
recruitment of accomplices, the claimed right to a
larger share of the fruits of the crime, the degree of
participation in planning or organizing the offense,
the nature and scope of the illegal activity, and the
degree of control and authority exercised over others.
2
USSG § 3B1.1 cmt. n.4.
Here, Villareal-Marrero controlled the activities of
several coconspirators, directing them to count the money
collected, deposit it into his bank accounts, and, on at least
one occasion, to collect money directly from a customer. These
individuals allowed him to lease his residence and purchase
antique vehicles in their names, and to conduct drug
transactions at their property. Moreover, as the district court
concluded, the distribution of the cocaine could not have
occurred without Villareal-Marrero because he was in direct
contact with the supplier. On these facts, we cannot conclude
that the district court clearly erred when it found Villareal-
Marrero to be a leader or organizer.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the material before this
court and argument will not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3