United States v. Victor M. Diaz-Rios, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 2025

Diaz-Rios pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute a large quantity of cocaine, facing a 10-year statutory minimum.
Government and Diaz-Rios anticipated a two-level mitigating-role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2; the district court did not discuss § 3B1.2 factors beyond drug quantity.
A safety valve reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) and U.S.S.G. §§ 5C1.2, 2D1.1(b)(16) was contemplated in the plea; Diaz-Rios later provided a safety-valve proffer.
The record shows Diaz-Rios had a minor role: he participated briefly as a courier, unaware of the drug quantity; multiple co-conspirators were more culpable.
The district court sentenced Diaz-Rios to 87 months, rejecting a minor-role finding; it relied heavily on the large drug amount and did not adequately explain § 3B1.2 analysis.
On appeal, the Seventh Circuit vacates the sentence and remands for a more complete § 3B1.2 explanation and potential reconsideration of participant status.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court adequately explained § 3B1.2 factors.	Diaz-Rios contends the court failed to consider all § 3B1.2 factors.	Diaz-Rios's position is supported by the government; the court relied only on drug quantity.	Remand for a more complete § 3B1.2 explanation.
Whether Diaz-Rios could be considered a minor participant given his role and the record.	Diaz-Rios argues his role was limited to a single occasion, exchanging money for drugs.	The government argues defendant’s role was not minor due to large amount entrusted and coordination.	Remand possible; district court could find Diaz-Rios substantially less culpable; vacate and remand.

United States v. Leiskunas, 656 F.3d 732 (7th Cir. 2011) (interpretation of § 3B1.2 reviewed de novo; factual findings reviewed for clear error)
United States v. Saenz, 623 F.3d 461 (7th Cir. 2010) (consideration of 3B1.2 factors; remand when record unclear)
United States v. Mendoza, 457 F.3d 726 (7th Cir. 2006) (role in conspiracy; assessment of minor participant factors)
United States v. Hunte, 196 F.3d 687 (7th Cir. 1999) (analysis of defendant's role and guidelines factors)
United States v. Stephenson, 53 F.3d 836 (7th Cir. 1995) (considerations for determining role in offense)
United States v. Agee, 83 F.3d 882 (7th Cir. 1995) (remand when § 3B1.2 rationale is ambiguous)
United States v. Gutierrez, 978 F.2d 1463 (7th Cir. 1992) (remand for explanation of guidance-based decisions)
United States v. Scroggins, 939 F.2d 416 (7th Cir. 1991) (remand for more complete explanation of § 3B1.2)
United States v. Gonzalez, 534 F.3d 613 (7th Cir. 2008) (large drug quantity and role considerations under § 3B1.2)
United States v. Bautista, 532 F.3d 667 (7th Cir. 2008) (role in conspiracy and sentencing adjustments)
United States v. Gallardo, 497 F.3d 727 (7th Cir. 2007) (mitigating role considerations and quantity impact)
United States v. Navarro, 90 F.3d 1245 (7th Cir. 1996) (courts evaluate whether mules qualify for minor role)