United States v. Saul Ruelas-Valdovinos
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 6396
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- Ruelas-Valdovinos supplied most of the cocaine distributed by 22 co-conspirators in southern Illinois and Missouri over several years.
- He pled guilty to conspiring to distribute cocaine and possessing cocaine with intent to distribute.
- A house in Chicago owned by Vazquez-Gonzalez served as a distribution hub; other conspirators picked up cocaine there and transported it south for sale.
- Vazquez-Gonzalez planned to be away; he directed Hernandez-Barahono to work directly with Ruelas-Valdovinos.
- Law enforcement seizures yielded large cash sums ($205,000; later $85,000 and $91,000); Ruelas-Valdovinos suspected diversions from him.
- The district court applied a three-level upward adjustment for supervisor/manager and a two-level adjustment for credible threats, yielding a guideline range of 235–293 months and an above-guideline sentence of 327 months.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 3B1.1 applies to a cocaine supplier who does not supervise. | Ruelas-Valdovinos did not supervise anyone; only supplied cocaine. | His communications and threats evidenced control over conspirators. | Yes; § 3B1.1 applied. |
| Whether any error in applying § 3B1.1 was harmless given the court's alternative departure justification. | Error would affect the sentence. | Even if error, departure would yield the same net sentence. | Harmless error; sentence would be the same. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Weaver, 716 F.3d 439 (7th Cir. 2013) (supervisor enhancement requires actual control)
- United States v. Vargas, 16 F.3d 155 (7th Cir. 1994) (supplier may not trigger § 3B1.1 without control)
- United States v. Brown, 944 F.2d 1377 (7th Cir. 1991) (supervisory role requires control over others)
- United States v. Grigsby, 692 F.3d 778 (7th Cir. 2012) (definition of supervisor/manager in § 3B1.1)
- United States v. Figueroa, 682 F.3d 694 (7th Cir. 2012) (supervisor entails telling others what to do)
- United States v. Bennett, 708 F.3d 879 (7th Cir. 2013) (coercive control as supervisory behavior)
- United States v. Hawkins, 480 F.3d 476 (7th Cir. 2007) (considerations in supervisory determinations)
- United States v. Mustread, 42 F.3d 1097 (7th Cir. 1994) (evidentiary standard for control in § 3B1.1 cases)
- United States v. Rabiu, 721 F.3d 467 (7th Cir. 2013) (harmless-error approach when district departs)