59 F.4th 533
1st Cir.2023Background
- Portell completed a 37-month federal sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm and began a 3‑year term of supervised release.
- Fifteen months into supervised release, Puerto Rico police charged him under Article 3.2 (aggravated abuse) after an incident in which he allegedly pushed and punched his pregnant partner and broke her phone; the state complaint was later dismissed for speedy-trial reasons.
- The probation officer filed a motion summarizing the state-court allegations; at the federal revocation hearing Portell admitted violating the supervised‑release conditions and did not contest the probation officer’s motion.
- The district court initially graded the violation as Grade A and imposed 24 months’ imprisonment; on appeal this Court vacated and remanded because the grading analysis conflicted with circuit precedent.
- On remand the court regraded the violation as Grade B (GSR 8–14 months) but again imposed a 24‑month upwardly‑variant sentence, citing the alleged assaultive conduct described in the probation officer’s motion and Portell’s admissions.
- Portell argued on appeal that the district court had improperly relied on untranslated Spanish state‑court documents in violation of the Jones Act and that the record lacked reliable evidence to support an above‑guidelines sentence; the First Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court violated the Jones Act by relying on untranslated Spanish state‑court documents | The court did not rely on the untranslated complaint; it relied on the probation officer’s motion and Portell’s admissions | The court impermissibly relied on the Spanish‑language state complaint in violation of the Jones Act | Court held the district court relied on the probation officer’s motion and Portell’s admission; any reference to state documents was at most cumulative and harmless |
| Whether there was sufficiently reliable evidence to support an upward variance based on alleged assaultive conduct (unproven state charges) | The probation officer’s motion plus Portell’s admission supplied adequate indicia of reliability for sentencing purposes | Mere arrest or unproven charges are insufficient; Portell did not admit to specific conduct and thus no reliable basis for a variance | Court held Portell’s admission to the probation officer’s motion (and his failure to object) provided sufficient indicia of reliability; district court properly considered the conduct |
| Whether the 24‑month sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable | The sentence was justified under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) given the seriousness of the conduct, need for deterrence and protection of the public | The sentence was procedurally and substantively unreasonable because it exceeded the Guidelines range and rested on unreliable/untranslated evidence | Court affirmed: district court followed the required steps, explained its reasons, and the upward variance was within its broad discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972) (revocation hearings may consider evidence, including hearsay)
- Millán-Isaac v. United States, 749 F.3d 57 (1st Cir. 2014) (Jones Act prohibits consideration of untranslated documents unless harmless/cumulative)
- Colón-Maldonado v. United States, 953 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2020) (sentencing court may consider non‑admissible evidence if sufficiently reliable)
- Rivera-Ruiz v. United States, 43 F.4th 172 (1st Cir. 2022) (court may not rely on bare arrest records unsupported by admission or other reliable evidence)
- Dávila-Bonilla v. United States, 968 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2020) (unobjected-to admissions in preparer’s report provide indicia of reliability for sentencing)
- Rodríguez-Reyes v. United States, 925 F.3d 558 (1st Cir. 2019) (unobjected portions of a PSR can supply reliability beyond mere arrest)