United States v. Mario Mondragon
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10974
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Appellant Mario Mondragon was convicted of a multi-year conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine (2012–June 2014) and possession with intent to distribute; jury convicted on both counts.
- Presentence Report attributed at least 26 kg methamphetamine to Mondragon, calculated base offense level 38 and recommended enhancements including +2 for possession of a weapon under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1).
- Two coconspirators’ statements summarized in the PSR: Garry Carroll (Met Mondragon during the conspiracy) reported seeing Mondragon break down/clean a revolver at Carroll’s residence; Donald Young said he had seen Mondragon with at least two handguns in the past.
- Mondragon objected that the record did not link firearm possession to drug activity and argued the PSR summaries were insufficient because no in-court testimony established the nexus or even the weapon possession.
- District court applied the +2 weapon enhancement by preponderance of evidence, adopted PSR, but varied downward from life to 360 months. Mondragon appealed only the weapon-enhancement ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Gov't) | Defendant's Argument (Mondragon) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 2D1.1(b)(1) +2 enhancement applies | Evidence (PSR summaries) shows firearm was present during the conspiracy and thus temporally/spatially linked to drug activity | PSR summaries do not show any nexus; coconspirators’ statements merely show past firearm possession unconnected to drugs | Court affirmed: Preponderance satisfied by Carroll’s report (occurred during conspiracy) and inferable spatial nexus; enhancement proper |
| Whether PSR hearsay alone suffices to prove firearm possession | Sentencing court may consider reliable hearsay and undisputed PSR material; gov’t need not produce in-court testimony if defendant fails to rebut | The court erred because weapon possession was based solely on PSR summaries and not live testimony | Court rejected preservation point and held PSR hearsay may be credited when undisputed and sufficiently reliable; Mondragon failed to show PSR unreliable |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. McAllister, 272 F.3d 228 (4th Cir. 2001) (weapon-enhancement reversed where witness gave no facts linking handgun possession to narcotics transactions)
- United States v. Slade, 631 F.3d 185 (4th Cir. 2011) (enhancement proper when weapon possessed in connection with drug activity in same course of conduct)
- United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621 (4th Cir. 2010) (government must prove weapon-possession nexus by preponderance; enhancement applies when possession is connected to drug activity)
- United States v. Johnson, 943 F.2d 383 (4th Cir. 1991) (government need not prove precisely concurrent acts to satisfy presence of weapon)
- United States v. Wilkinson, 590 F.3d 259 (4th Cir. 2010) (sentencing court may consider relevant information including uncorroborated hearsay if sufficiently reliable)
- United States v. Terry, 916 F.2d 157 (4th Cir. 1990) (defendant bears burden to challenge accuracy of PSR and must articulate reasons why facts are untrue)
- IGEN Int’l, Inc. v. Roche Diagnostics GmbH, 335 F.3d 303 (4th Cir. 2003) (issues not raised in opening appellate brief are typically waived)