Case: 19-11835 Date Filed: 10/28/2019 Page: 1 of 4
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 19-11835
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:18-cr-00525-JSM-TGW-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
HENRY BONILLA ARIAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(October 28, 2019)
Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, WILLIAM PRYOR, and JILL PRYOR, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 19-11835 Date Filed: 10/28/2019 Page: 2 of 4
This case began on a boat in the Pacific Ocean, 240 nautical miles off the
southwest border of El Salvador and Guatemala. Henry Bonilla Arias, the captain,
and two others were caught piloting a “go-fast boat” with over two tons of cocaine
on board. The United States Coast Guard apprehended the three smugglers and
took them to Florida. Arias pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine, and to aiding and abetting the
possession with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine.
At sentencing, Arias’ attorney argued that he should receive safety-valve
relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) and U.S.S.G. §5.1.2 for cooperating with the
prosecution. Even though Arias had cooperated and provided some information,
the government argued that he had not been truthful when he claimed he did not
know the real name of “Tourista” — the man who had paid him to smuggle the
drugs — and was therefore not eligible for safety-valve relief. See 18 U.S.C. §
3553(f)(5) (stating that, to qualify for safety-valve relief, the defendant must
“truthfully provide[] to the Government all information and evidence the defendant
has concerning the offense or offenses that were part of the same course of conduct
or of a common scheme or plan”).
After hearing from each side, the court found it was unlikely that Arias did
not know who hired him. Doc 87 at 9 (“It’s hard for me to believe some unknown
person comes up and offers $10,000 in cash and has no idea who the person is.”).
2
Case: 19-11835 Date Filed: 10/28/2019 Page: 3 of 4
Because it found Arias was untruthful, the court denied safety-valve relief. Arias
was sentenced to 180 months in prison. He appeals.
We review the district court’s factual findings and denial of safety-valve
relief only for clear error. United States v. Johnson, 375 F.3d 1300, 1301 (11th
Cir. 2004). Whether the information the defendant provided the government was
truthful and complete is a question of fact for the district court. United States v.
Brownlee, 204 F.3d 1302, 1305 (11th Cir. 2000). In determining the truthfulness
of a defendant, the district court must independently assess the facts and may not
simply defer to the government on the issue. United States v. Espinosa, 172 F.3d
795, 797 (11th Cir. 1999).
Arias’ only contention on appeal is that the district court deferred to the
government instead of making its own judgment about whether he was truthful.
We disagree. In Espinosa we overturned the district court where it found that
because Espinosa had not testified at trial it had no way of knowing if he was
telling the truth. 172 F.3d at 797. So it simply adopted the government’s theory.
Id. But that is not what happened here. The district court heard from both sides. It
asked questions. And, once it had enough information, the court determined it was
likely that Arias knew who hired him and that he was being untruthful when he
said he didn’t. It is not clear what more the court could have done to make an
3
Case: 19-11835 Date Filed: 10/28/2019 Page: 4 of 4
independent assessment. The district court did not commit clear error in denying
the safety-valve relief.
AFFIRMED.
4