United States v. Francisco Pichardo, 659 F. App'x 603

Francisco Pichardo was arrested and tried by jury for: conspiracy to import cocaine (21 U.S.C. § 963), conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine (21 U.S.C. § 846), and possession with intent to distribute cocaine (21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)); sentenced to 130 months.
At arrest officers gave oral and written Miranda warnings; Pichardo signed a waiver form and made post-arrest statements.
Officers permitted Pichardo to call his children’s mother and he was not handcuffed while reviewing the waiver; officer testified Pichardo knowingly waived rights.
Trial evidence included Pichardo’s post-arrest admissions, a recorded/observed phone call to the conspiracy leader about an upcoming shipment, and co‑conspirator testimony that Pichardo received cocaine and later returned cash proceeds.
Pichardo moved to suppress his statements, for judgment of acquittal, and for a minor-role (USSG §3B1.2) reduction at sentencing; the district court denied each motion and this appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Pichardo voluntarily waived Miranda so his post‑arrest statements were admissible	Waiver was involuntary/coerced because he was stressed about children at home	Officers properly gave oral and written warnings; he reviewed and signed waiver, was not coerced	Waiver was knowing and voluntary; statements admissible
Whether evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions (import conspiracy; possession conspiracy; possession with intent to distribute)	Testimony (especially co‑conspirator) was unreliable and insufficient	Admissions, phone call about shipment, co‑conspirator testimony and cash exchange supported guilt	Viewing evidence in government’s favor, a reasonable jury could convict on all counts; sufficiency upheld
Whether Pichardo was entitled to a minor‑participant sentencing reduction	Role was limited (only courier/low‑level) and less culpable than others	Evidence showed substantial role: exchanged cocaine for cash, shared proceeds, coordinated receipt of shipments	District court did not clearly err denying the minor‑participant reduction

United States v. Bervaldi, 226 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 2000) (standard of review for suppression: factual findings for clear error, legal questions de novo)
United States v. McPhee, 336 F.3d 1269 (11th Cir. 2003) (deference to district court credibility findings at suppression hearings)
United States v. Bernal‑Benitez, 594 F.3d 1303 (11th Cir. 2010) (Miranda waiver voluntariness framework)
United States v. Bowman, 302 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2002) (de novo review of sufficiency and denial of acquittal)
United States v. Hansen, 262 F.3d 1217 (11th Cir. 2001) (viewing evidence and inferences in light most favorable to government)
United States v. Glinton, 154 F.3d 1245 (11th Cir. 1998) (accepting jury credibility determinations)
United States v. Obregon, 893 F.2d 1307 (11th Cir. 1990) (elements for conspiracy to import narcotics)
United States v. Lopez‑Ramirez, 68 F.3d 438 (11th Cir. 1995) (elements for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute)
United States v. Mercer, 541 F.3d 1070 (11th Cir. 2008) (elements for possession with intent to distribute)
United States v. Battle, 892 F.2d 992 (11th Cir. 1990) (constructive possession standard)
United States v. Broadwell, 870 F.2d 594 (11th Cir. 1989) (co‑conspirator testimony can support conviction even if uncorroborated)
United States v. Rodriguez De Varon, 175 F.3d 930 (11th Cir. 1999) (standards and burden for sentencing role adjustments)

AFFIRMED.