United States v. Aya

USCA1 Opinion




June 14, 1995





UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT


____________________


No. 94-2142

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

ARGERMIRO AYA,

Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

ERRATA SHEET



The opinion of this court issued on June 8, 1995 is amended as
follows:

On page 5, second line from the bottom, change the word "minor"
to "minimal".






































June 8, 1995
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

____________________


No. 94-2142

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

ARGERMIRO AYA,

Defendant, Appellant.


____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

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

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Selya and Lynch, Circuit Judges. ______________

____________________

Elfrick Mendez Morales on brief for appellant. ______________________
Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, Jacabed Rodriguez-Coss, ______________ _______________________
Assistant United States Attorney, and Jose A. Quiles-Espinosa, Senior _______________________
Litigation Counsel, on brief for appellee.


____________________

____________________
















Per Curiam. Argermiro Aya pleaded guilty to ___________

possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of

21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced him to

57 months imprisonment. On appeal from this sentence, Aya

raises only one issue. He contends that the sentencing court

erred in reducing his offense level by only two levels, for

his role in the offense as a "minor" participant, instead of

by four levels, in recognition of his role as a "minimal"

participant. See United States Sentencing Commission, ___

Guidelines Manual, 3B1.2 (November, 1993) ("Sentencing __________________

Guidelines"). We affirm.

I. Background __________

The following facts are derived from the pre-

sentence report ("PSR") to which neither party objected. Aya

arrived in Puerto Rico at the Luis Munoz Marin International

airport on May 14, 1994 on a flight from Panama City, en

route to Madrid, Spain. U.S. Customs officials had

identified Aya and two other passengers as fitting the

profile of a narcotics trafficker. Custom agents separately

stopped both Aya and another passenger, later identified as

Hector R. Zamora-Velez, at the airport in Puerto Rico. Pat

downs and subsequent searches revealed that Aya and Zamora

were each wearing vests with pockets containing packages of

cocaine. The cocaine found on Aya had a net weight of 4,503

grams or 4.5 kilograms and an average purity strength of 81%.

















The cocaine found on Zamora had a net weight of 4,339 grams

and an average purity strength of 77%.

According to the PSR, Zamora waived his rights at

the time of his arrest and stated that he and Aya were

travelling together. He said that a few weeks earlier he had

been approached in Colombia by an (unnamed) person who asked

him if he wanted to earn $5,000. That person provided Aya

and Zamora with passports, airline tickets and a small amount

of cash. The two allegedly obtained the cocaine and vests in

Panama, where they boarded the plane for Spain, via Puerto

Rico. Aya, in a later conversation with a probation officer,

also stated that he was going to be paid $5,000 upon the

delivery of the drugs in Spain. He claimed that he had

agreed to smuggle the drugs because he needed the money to

pay his father's medical bills.

A two-count indictment charged Aya with possession

with intent to distribute approximately 5.1 kilograms of

cocaine (Count One) and importing the same quantity of

cocaine (Count Two). After initially pleading not guilty,

Aya changed his plea to guilty on Count One, pursuant to a

plea agreement entered on July 26, 1994, in which the

government agreed to move for dismissal of Count Two. The

parties also agreed to stipulate that Aya was personally

responsible for the possession with intent to distribute of

4.5 kilograms of cocaine.



-4-













A PSR was prepared, recommending a base offense

level of 30 and a reduction of three levels for acceptance of

responsibility and two levels for Aya's role in the offense

as a "courier". See U.S.S.G. 3B1.2(b) (providing for a ___

decrease of two levels where the defendant is a "minor

participant"). The total offense level of 25 and a criminal

history category of I yielded a guideline sentencing range of

57 to 71 months. There were no objections to the PSR.

At the sentencing hearing, the district court

denied defendant's request for a four-level reduction for his

role as a "minimal" participant in the offense. The reasons

given, if any, are not included as part of the record.

(Apparently, a transcript of the sentencing hearing was not

prepared.) The sentencing court adopted the factual findings

and guideline application in the PSR, however, which included

a finding that Aya's role was as a courier. Although the

statutory mandatory minimum sentence was five years, the

district court agreed with defendant and the government that

Aya met the criteria under 18 U.S.C. 3553(f).1 Therefore,

the court imposed a prison sentence of 57 months.






____________________

1. Section 3553(f) provides that a Guideline sentence below
the statutory minimum may be imposed for defendants with no
more than 1 criminal history point, if certain other criteria
are also met.

-5-













II. Discussion __________

Section 3B1.2 of the Sentencing Guidelines provides

for reductions in a defendant's offense level based upon his

role in the offense: a decrease of 4 levels if the defendant

was a "minimal participant" and a decrease of 2 levels if the

defendant was a "minor participant." Commentary to the

Sentencing Guidelines provides that "[t]he determination of a

defendant's role in the offense is to be made on the basis of

all conduct within the scope of 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct),

i.e., all conduct included under 1B1.3(a)(1)-(4), and not ____

solely on the basis of elements and acts cited in the count

of conviction." U.S.S.G. 3B1 (introductory commentary). In

the commentary to 3B1.2, the four-level reduction for

minimal participation is explained as follows:

It is intended to cover defendants who
are plainly among the least culpable of
those involved in the conduct of a
group.. . .

It is intended that the downward
adjustment for a minimal participant will
be used infrequently. It would be
appropriate, for example, . . . in a case
where an individual was recruited as a
courier for a single smuggling
transaction involving a small amount of
drugs.

A two-level reduction for "minimal" participation is meant

for a participant "who is less culpable than most other

participants, but whose role could not be described as

minor." U.S.S.G. 3B1.2 (commentary).



-6-













The defendant has the burden of proving entitlement

to a downward adjustment pursuant to 3B1.2. United States _____________

v. Munoz, 36 F.3d 1229, 1238 (1st Cir. 1994), cert. denied, _____ _____ ______

__ U.S. __, 115 S. Ct. 1164 (1995). This court has recently

emphasized that "[r]ole-in-the offense determinations are

innately fact-specific. The court of appeals must,

therefore, pay careful heed to the sentencing judge's views."

United States v. Rostoff, No. 93-1376, slip op. at 29 (1st ______________ _______

Cir. April 24, 1995) (citation omitted). "Absent a mistake

of law, a district court's finding as to whether a defendant

was a minor or minimal participant will be reversed only if

clearly erroneous." United States v. Neal, 36 F.3d 1190, 1211 _____________ ____

(1st Cir. 1994).

Aya argues that his role in the offense was that of

a mere courier, a role that he argues is necessarily ___________

"minimal." This court has twice directly rejected that

argument. In United States v. Lopez-Gil, 965 F.2d 1124, 1131 _____________ _________

(1st Cir. 1992), we held that "a defendant who is a drug

courier is not entitled as of right to a reduction of the

offense level as a minimal or minor participant." Lopez-Gil

was arrested at the same airport in Puerto Rico, also en __

route to Spain, carrying suitcases containing cocaine. _____

Although the district court determined that Lopez-Gil "'acted

as a courier and apparently had no proprietary interest in

the cocaine as such,'" it refused to grant him even a two-



-7-













level reduction for minor involvement. Id. at 1126 (quoting ___

sentencing court). Nonetheless, this court affirmed the

sentence. Id. at 1131. ___

Lopez-Gil cited to this Court's holding to the same _________

effect in United States v. Paz Uribe, 891 F.2d 396, 399 (1st ______________ _________

Cir. 1989) ("[E]ven if the court had found that Paz was only

a courier, he would not automatically be entitled to a

reduction."), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 951 (1990). Under these _____ ______

circumstances, the district court did not clearly err in

sentencing Aya as a "minor" rather than a "minimal"

participant.

Appellant's sentence is therefore affirmed. See ________ ___

Loc. R. 27.1.



























-8-