Opinion
00 Cr. 1306 (RWS)
May 21, 2002
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 13, 2002, this Court issued an opinion sentencing Ramon Maria Martinez ("Martinez") to 87 months imprisonment, followed by a five-year term of supervised release, subject to a sentencing hearing which was adjourned to May 21, 2002. In that opinion, Martinez was denied his request that he receive a two-point deduction in his offense level for being a "minor participant," as defined by the United States Sentencing Guidelines (the "Guidelines"), in a conspiracy to distribute heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. After receiving further briefing by counsel on the issue, and upon further consideration, the opinion of March 13, 2002 will be amended to include the requested two-point adjustment.
As set forth in the March 13, 2002 opinion, the Court of Appeals has held that a defendant's status as a mere drug courier does not automatically qualify him for an adjustment as a "minor" or "minimal" participant under § 3B1.2. United States v. Garcia, 920 F.2d 153, 155 (2d Cir. 1990). Rather, "such factors as the nature of the defendant's relationship to other participants, the importance of the defendant's actions to the success of the venture, and the defendant's awareness of the nature and scope of the criminal enterprise" must be considered. Id.
In light of the factors listed in Garcia, the Court's March 13, 2002 opinion rejected Martinez's argument that he was a minor participant under § 3B1.2 of the Guidelines. That assessment was based in part on facts indicating that Martinez had transported a substantial amount of heroin in five separate trips to Detroit within a four-month period, and had on at least one occasion helped handle, prepare, and package the heroin for shipment. See United States v. Martinez, No. 00 Cr. 1306 (RWS), 2002 WL 432376, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar 20, 2002)
However, as confirmed by counsels' submissions and the Presentence Report prepared by the U.S. Probation Office, the following indicia of minor participation were present for each of Martinez's trips to Detroit: (1) Martinez did not own the drugs; (2) Martinez did not finance any part of the offense; (3) Martinez had no decision-making authority in the operation; (4) Martinez did not sell the drugs; and (5) Martinez had a distinct lack of knowledge or understanding of the scope and structure of the enterprise. In essence, Martinez's participation in the offense was that of a courier. Although Martinez acknowledges that on one occasion he helped package the drugs for shipment, that instance was limited to securing the heroin in a suitcase with masking tape and, for approximately thirty minutes, securing drug pellets in the suitcase while Manuel Beltre left to pick up more drugs. These facts are hardly indicative of a substantial role in the enterprise being conducted by Manuel Beltre and his brother, Edward Beltre. Rather, they demonstrate that Martinez was far less culpable than either his co-conspirators or the "average participant" in such an enterprise. See Garcia, 920 F.2d at 155; U.S.S.G. § 3B1.l Appl. Note 3(A).
The factors established by the Court of Appeals in Garcia were not established to preclude drug couriers from receiving a downward adjustment under § 3B1.2 of the Guidelines. Rather, they were a reflection of the fact that, under the Guidelines, a determination of whether a defendant qualifies for a mitigating role adjustment is heavily dependent on the facts of the particular case at hand. See Garcia, 920 F.2d at 155. The Background Commentary to the amendments that have been enacted since Garcia was decided reflect this reading, see U.S.S.G. § 3B1.l Appl. Note 3, as do the opinions of other circuits. See, e.g., United States v. Isaza-Zapata, 148 F.3d 236, 239 (3d Cir. 1998) ("Although some of the courts considering this issue have noted the centrality or essential nature of the courier's role, they have done so in pointed response to the defendants' contentions that a courier should automatically qualify for a minor role adjustment, and have proceeded then to engage in an analysis of the defendant's conduct in relation to others. . . . These cases do not stand for the proposition that the minor role adjustment never applies to couriers, or that the court should forego an analysis of the defendant's relative role."); see also United States v. Harfst, 168 F.3d 398, 403 (10th Cir. 1999) ("We have held that a courier is not necessarily a minor or minimal participant, not that a courier is ineligible for a § 3B1.2 adjustment."). Finally, it should be recognized that Garcia was an affirmation, using the clearly erroneous standard, of a lower court denial of a § 3B1.2 adjustment. In this circuit, a courier transporting as much as 25 kilograms of cocaine has been found to be a minor participant. See United States v. Fernandez, 877 F.2d 1138 (2d Cir. 1989)
In sum, the specific facts of this case and the authority cited above demonstrate that Martinez was less culpable than the average participant in the crime that has been charged and qualifies as a "minor participant" within the meaning of § 3B1.2. Accordingly, his adjusted offense level is reduced to 27 and the applicable sentencing range under the Guidelines is 70 to 87 months.
Martinez will therefore be sentenced to 70 months imprisonment. All other aspects of his sentence outlined in the opinion of March 13, 2002, including the term and conditions of supervised release and the special assessment fee of $100, will remain as stated in that opinion.
This sentence is subject to modification at the sentencing hearing now set for May 21, 2002.
It is so ordered.