United States v. Miguel Monzo, 852 F.3d 1343

Miguel Monzo pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute ≥50g methamphetamine and was sentenced to 120 months (statutory minimum).
District court denied Monzo a 2-level minor-role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 after finding he packaged high‑purity meth, mailed it to Miami distributors, and directed where sale proceeds should be deposited.
Sentencing calculation included 3 criminal history points for a 2001 Nevada felony drug‑possession conviction (revoked probation leading to a 12–30 month sentence) and 2 points for a 2007 New Mexico misdemeanor concealing‑identity conviction (credit for time served).
Monzo argued: (1) he was a minor participant; (2) the Nevada conviction did not produce a >13‑month "sentence of imprisonment" within the Guidelines time frame; and (3) the New Mexico conviction should not have counted.
Monzo further argued that without those two contested sets of points he would have ≤1 criminal history point and thus qualify for Safety Valve relief (U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2), avoiding the statutory minimum.
Eleventh Circuit affirmed: (1) no clear error in denying minor‑role reduction; (2) three points for the Nevada conviction were proper under § 4A1.2(k); and (3) even if the New Mexico conviction was improperly counted, the error was harmless because Monzo still had more than one criminal history point and thus was ineligible for Safety Valve relief.

Issue	Monzo's Argument	Government/District Court Argument	Held
Denial of minor‑role reduction under § 3B1.2	Monzo was a low‑level courier deserving a 2‑level reduction	Record showed packaging high‑purity meth, mailing to distributors, and directing deposit accounts — he was important to the scheme	Affirmed — no clear error; district court reasonably found not minor participant
Assessment of 3 criminal history points for 2001 Nevada felony	Revocation occurred outside probationary period / he didn’t serve a sentence >13 months so points improper	Under § 4A1.2(k) add original term plus revocation term; the imposed term was 12–30 months so sentence counted as 30 months and falls within 15‑year window	Affirmed — Guidelines treat term imposed (not time actually served); 3 points proper
Assessment of 2 points for 2007 NM concealing‑identity & Safety Valve eligibility	The misdemeanor (credit for time served on unrelated custody) should not count; without those 2 points Monzo would be eligible for Safety Valve	Even if those 2 points were erroneous, Monzo still had >1 criminal history point (from Nevada + another conviction), so Safety Valve inapplicable	Harmless error (if any) — Monzo still ineligible for Safety Valve; sentence remains the statutory minimum

De Varon v. United States, 175 F.3d 930 (11th Cir. 1999) (en banc) (framework for assessing § 3B1.2 role reductions and factors to consider)
Bernal‑Benitez v. United States, 594 F.3d 1303 (11th Cir. 2010) (clear error review of role‑reduction denials)
White v. United States, 335 F.3d 1314 (11th Cir. 2003) (review standards for Guidelines legal and factual questions)
Ramirez‑Perez v. United States, 643 F.3d 173 (6th Cir. 2011) (interpreting “term of imprisonment” in § 4A1.2(k) as synonymous with “sentence of imprisonment”)
Jasso v. United States, 587 F.3d 706 (5th Cir. 2009) (same interpretation of § 4A1.2 terminology)
Rivers v. United States, 777 F.3d 1306 (11th Cir. 2015) (harmless‑error standard in sentencing context)
Cooper v. United States, 203 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 2000) (standards for when a defendant may collaterally attack a prior conviction at sentencing)