United States v. Rivera-Martinez
665 F.3d 344
| 1st Cir. | 2011Background
- Rivera-Martínez pleaded guilty March 6, 2000 to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of crack cocaine; entered a C-type plea under Rule 11(c)(1)(C) binding the district court to a pre-agreed sentence.
- The plea agreement fixed accountability for over 1.5 kilograms of cocaine base; base offense level 38 and total offense level 37 after adjustments.
- The agreement did not specify the defendant's criminal history category or sentencing range.
- Sentenced on September 12, 2000 to 240 months imprisonment based on the agreement.
- In 2007–2008, the Sentencing Commission issued retroactive amendments to crack cocaine quantities; defendant sought reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).
- This court affirmed denial in Rivera-Martínez I; Supreme Court later decided Freeman v. United States and remanded for reconsideration in light of Freeman.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rivera-Martínez is eligible for §3582(c)(2) relief after Freeman. | Rivera-Martínez contends eligibility under Justice Sotomayor's concurrence. | None stated beyond framing eligibility under Freeman's framework. | Not eligible under Sotomayor's framework; based on the plea terms lacking an express guideline range. |
| Whether a C-type plea that does not expressly identify a guideline range can qualify for eligibility under §3582(c)(2). | The agreement may reflect reliance on guidelines implied by negotiations. | Eligibility requires an express guideline range identified in the agreement. | Not eligible; absence of an identified range in the agreement prevents “based on” a lowered range. |
| Whether the judgment contains a clerical error requiring remand. | Remand for correction of the judgment is appropriate. | Not challenged. | Remand for limited correction of the judgment to reflect that Rivera-Martínez pleaded guilty to conspiracy, not the substantive offense. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rivera-Martínez v. United States, 607 F.3d 283 (1st Cir.2010) (prior denial of §3582(c)(2) relief in Rivera-Martínez I; related issues.)
- Freeman v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2685 (U.S. 2011) ( Supreme Court holding on eligibility under §3582(c)(2) for C-type pleas; remand guidance.)
- Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 (U.S. 1977) (narrowest grounds approach for fractured opinions.)
- United States v. Smith, 658 F.3d 608 (6th Cir.2011) (agree with Freeman framework on eligibility.)
- United States v. Brown, 653 F.3d 337 (4th Cir.2011) (concur with Sotomayor-based approach to eligibility.)