United States v. Zapata-Vazquez, 778 F.3d 21

Zapata admitted possession of 64 small bags of crack cocaine and a loaded 9mm pistol found after police approached him in an abandoned residence; he consented to a vehicle search that produced marijuana, two loaded magazines, and cash.
He was on probation for a prior local drug distribution conviction at the time of the offense.
Charged with possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine (21 U.S.C. § 841) and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)); he pleaded guilty to the § 924(c) count and the drug count was dismissed.
The written Rule 11(c)(1)(B) plea agreement recommended a 60‑month sentence (the Guidelines term for the § 924(c) offense).
The district court imposed an upward variant sentence of 72 months, citing the seriousness and pervasiveness of firearm offenses in Puerto Rico and Zapata’s probationary status.
Zapata appealed, challenging the procedural and substantive reasonableness of the 72‑month variant sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court procedurally erred by failing to consider § 3553(a) factors and overemphasizing community characteristics	Govt: District court adequately considered § 3553(a) and community characteristics may inform sentencing	Zapata: Court failed to consider rehabilitation and overemphasized Puerto Rico crime rates without tying them to his case	No procedural error; court stated it reviewed § 3553(a) factors, considered defendant’s history, probation status, and tied community concerns to deterrence and seriousness
Whether the upward variance was substantively unreasonable	Govt: Variance justified by seriousness of firearms offenses locally and defendant’s probation status	Zapata: Variance disproportionate given his acceptance of responsibility and potential for rehabilitation	Variance was substantively reasonable; district court offered a plausible rationale and the 12‑month increase falls within the broad range of reasonable sentences

United States v. Ocasio‑Cancel, 727 F.3d 85 (1st Cir. 2013) (sources appropriate for facts after a guilty plea)
United States v. Del Valle‑Rodríguez, 761 F.3d 171 (1st Cir. 2014) (sentence review standard: procedural then substantive reasonableness)
United States v. Vega‑Salgado, 769 F.3d 100 (1st Cir. 2014) (a district court’s statement that it considered § 3553(a) factors carries weight)
United States v. Clogston, 662 F.3d 588 (1st Cir. 2011) (no requirement to parse § 3553(a) mechanically)
United States v. Flores‑Machicote, 706 F.3d 16 (1st Cir. 2013) (community crime characteristics may inform seriousness and deterrence)
United States v. Politano, 522 F.3d 69 (1st Cir. 2008) (district court may weigh community characteristics in sentencing)
United States v. Santiago‑Rivera, 744 F.3d 229 (1st Cir. 2014) (court must weigh case‑specific circumstances alongside community factors)
United States v. Martin, 520 F.3d 87 (1st Cir. 2008) (substantive reasonableness requires a plausible rationale and defensible result)