United States v. Ramiro Salazar-Aleman
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 25496
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- Salazar-Aleman pled guilty to aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine; the conspiracy count was dismissed after sentencing.
- The district court denied a mitigating-role reduction under § 3B1.2 and imposed 108 months at the bottom of the guidelines range.
- Salazar-Aleman filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion alleging ineffective assistance for failure to file a notice of appeal; the district court resentenced him.
- DEA surveillance linked to a stash house led to 831.7 grams of methamphetamine found in a vehicle Salazar-Aleman drove.
- Salazar-Aleman was the courier in a single transaction; the district court considered the offense context but denied the mitigating-role reduction.
- District court stated it reviewed all § 3553(a) factors and imposed a bottom-of-range sentence; appeal follows.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mitigating-role reduction under § 3B1.2 | Salazar-Aleman | Salazar-Aleman | Not clear error; district court did not err in denial |
| § 3553(a) procedural consideration | Salazar-Aleman | Salazar-Aleman | No procedural error; district court properly considered factors |
| Substantive reasonableness of sentence | Salazar-Aleman | Salazar-Aleman | No abuse of discretion; sentence at bottom of guidelines affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455 (8th Cir. 2009) (abuse-of-discretion review for sentencing; ensure no procedural error and then substantive reasonableness)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (reasonableness of sentence and review framework)
- Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (U.S. 2007) (requirement to consider § 3553(a) factors; not necessarily detailed recitation)
- United States v. Ellis, 890 F.2d 1040 (8th Cir. 1989) (mitigating-role reduction factual findings reviewed for clear error)
- United States v. Young, 689 F.3d 941 (8th Cir. 2012) (support for standard of review of § 3B1.2 determinations)
- United States v. Deans, 590 F.3d 907 (8th Cir. 2010) (necessity of comparative culpability in mitigating-role analysis)
- United States v. Bueno, 443 F.3d 1017 (8th Cir. 2006) (rejecting mitigation where no evidence of relative culpability)