United States v. Jose Morales
707 F. App'x 839
| 5th Cir. | 2018Background
- Morales pleaded guilty to conspiracy to illegally transport aliens in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324 and was sentenced to 120 months.
- Presentence Report (PSR) attributed the transportation of at least 25 aliens to Morales; he did not rebut the PSR.
- District court applied a U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(2)(B) enhancement based on the 25–99 aliens finding.
- District court also applied U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(6) for conduct involving a substantial risk of bodily injury after finding Morales transported aliens in a vehicle trunk.
- District court denied a 3-level § 3E1.1 acceptance-of-responsibility reduction based on conduct while in custody (setting fires, possessing a shank/razor, attempting a second fire).
- Morales appealed the two guideline enhancements and the denial of the acceptance adjustment; the Fifth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court clearly erred in finding Morales accountable for 25–99 aliens for a § 2L1.1(b)(2)(B) enhancement | The PSR’s count was not supported; the enhancement was improper | PSR facts were plausible and adopted by the court; Morales did not rebut them | Affirmed; factual finding plausible and not clearly erroneous |
| Whether § 2L1.1(b)(6) enhancement for substantial risk of bodily injury was improper | Enhancement unwarranted because conduct did not create substantial risk | Transporting persons in a trunk creates a per se substantial risk; conduct listed in guideline commentary | Affirmed; trunk transport falls within guideline’s contemplated conduct |
| Whether denial of three-level § 3E1.1 acceptance-of-responsibility reduction was unsupported | Morales should receive reduction for acceptance of responsibility | Court found post-arrest dangerous conduct (fires, shank, razor) showing lack of acceptance/withdrawal | Affirmed; denial was not without foundation |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Williams, 610 F.3d 271 (5th Cir. 2010) (standard for reviewing factual findings in sentencing)
- United States v. Alaniz, 726 F.3d 586 (5th Cir. 2013) (factual findings plausible in light of record are not clearly erroneous)
- United States v. Rodriguez, 630 F.3d 377 (5th Cir. 2011) (clear-error review of § 2L1.1(b)(6) factual findings)
- United States v. Mateo-Garza, 541 F.3d 290 (5th Cir. 2008) (transporting persons in trunk/engine compartment creates substantial risk of serious injury or death)
- United States v. Buchanan, 485 F.3d 274 (5th Cir. 2007) (deference standard for § 3E1.1 denial)
- United States v. Juarez-Duarte, 513 F.3d 204 (5th Cir. 2008) (§ 3E1.1 denial reversible only if without foundation)
- United States v. Watkins, 911 F.2d 983 (5th Cir. 1990) (district court may consider voluntary withdrawal/termination when evaluating acceptance adjustment)