United States v. Jose Vasquez, 679 F. App'x 470

Jose Vasquez pled guilty to distributing heroin and admitted to 187 grams (three transactions in 2013).
FBI intercepted two phone calls between Vasquez and co-conspirator Juan Moyano (July 14 and August 1, 2013).
An FBI agent provided a sworn interpretation of those calls (based on context, training, and investigation knowledge): the July call referred to a kilogram of cocaine; the August call referred to an additional 150 grams of heroin.
The probation officer incorporated the agent’s interpretations into the presentence report; Vasquez objected and argued the calls did not explicitly mention drugs or could mean other things.
The district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Vasquez was responsible for the unadmitted drug quantities, leading to a guideline range of 92–115 months (offense level 23, criminal history VI).
On appeal, Vasquez argued the district court clearly erred because the government lacked sufficient reliable evidence to attribute the additional drug weights to him.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether district court had reliable evidence to attribute 150 g heroin from Aug. call	Government: FBI agent’s sworn interpretation plus pricing/units supports inference heroin	Vasquez: No explicit mention of heroin; inference unreliable	Court: Agent’s sworn interpretation corroborated by unit/price and unrebutted — affirmed
Whether district court had reliable evidence to attribute 1 kg cocaine from July call	Government: Agent’s sworn interpretation and call transcript show “whole one”/“cabbage” = kg cocaine	Vasquez: Slang could mean money or marijuana; no direct corroboration like unit/price	Court: Transcript + agent’s sworn, explained interpretation is reliable and unrebutted — affirmed
Standard of proof and review for drug-quantity findings	Government: Preponderance of evidence; district court may rely on reliable PSR info	Vasquez: Challenges reliability of PSR material	Court: Review for clear error; defendant must show PSR info unreliable; Vasquez failed to do so
Admissibility/corroboration required for PSR drug-weight findings	Government: Agent’s sworn interpretation and contextual corroboration suffice	Vasquez: Argued need for more direct evidence or witness price testimony	Court: Corroborated, reliable, and uncontested PSR info can support findings; additional testimony not required

United States v. Brown, 822 F.3d 966 (7th Cir.) (standard of review for drug-weight findings)
United States v. Artley, 489 F.3d 813 (7th Cir.) (guidance on review and reliability of PSR information)
United States v. Clark, 538 F.3d 803 (7th Cir.) (affording reliability to investigative affidavits and agent explanations)
United States v. Abdulahi, 523 F.3d 757 (7th Cir.) (PSR materials and agent reports as reliable evidence of drug-weight)
United States v. Stevens, 500 F.3d 625 (7th Cir.) (argument is not evidence; need for admissible proof)
United States v. Betts, 576 F.3d 738 (7th Cir.) (witness testimony can corroborate pricing but is not always necessary)
United States v. Hankton, 432 F.3d 779 (7th Cir.) (discussing corroboration for sentencing findings)
United States v. Moreno-Padilla, 602 F.3d 802 (7th Cir.) (unreliable “naked” allegations cannot support PSR findings)
United States v. Garrett, 757 F.3d 560 (7th Cir.) (use of reliable PSR information for sentencing)
United States v. Noble, 246 F.3d 946 (7th Cir.) (reliance on PSR when information is reliable)