U.S. v. Zuleta-Alvarez, ZULETA-ALVAREZ
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before CAMPBELL and TORRUELLA; TORRUELLA |
| Citation | 922 F.2d 33 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. John Jairo, a/k/a John Zuleta, Defendant, Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Germain, a/k/a Germain Fernandez-Ramirez, a/k/a Germain Ramirez, a/k/a Herman, Defendant, Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Ralph GUTHZEIT, Defendant, Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Richard Allen WEST, a/k/a Dicky West, Defendant, Appellant. to 89-2106 and 90-1062. . Heard |
| Docket Number | Nos. 89-2104,ZULETA-ALVAREZ,RAMIREZ-FERNANDEZ,s. 89-2104 |
| Decision Date | 07 September 1990 |
Page 33
v.
John Jairo ZULETA-ALVAREZ, a/k/a John Zuleta, Defendant, Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Germain RAMIREZ-FERNANDEZ, a/k/a Germain Fernandez-Ramirez,
a/k/a Germain Ramirez, a/k/a Herman, Defendant, Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Ralph GUTHZEIT, Defendant, Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Richard Allen WEST, a/k/a Dicky West, Defendant, Appellant.
First Circuit.
Decided Dec. 21, 1990.
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc
Denied Feb. 21, 1991.
Page 34
Julian L. Sweet, Lewiston, Me., by appointment of the Court, for defendant, appellant John Jairo Zuleta-Alvarez.
William W. McCandless, Jr., Portland, Me., by appointment of the Court, for defendant, appellant Germain Ramirez-Fernandez.
Thomas F. Hallett, Portland, Me., for defendant, appellant Ralph Guthzeit.
Page 35
David Beneman, with whom Levenson, Vickerson & Beneman, Portland, Me., was on brief for defendant, appellant Richard Allen West.
F. Mark Terison, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Richard S. Cohen, U.S. Atty., Portland, Me., was on brief for appellee.
Before CAMPBELL and TORRUELLA, Circuit Judges, and CAFFREY, * Senior District Judge.
TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge.
This is a consolidated appeal from four convictions returned in the United States District Court for the District of Maine. Defendant-appellants John Jairo Zuleta-Alvarez, Germain Ramirez-Fernandez and Ralph Guthzeit were convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in excess of 500 grams of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 846. Defendant-appellant Richard Allen West was acquitted on the conspiracy charge but was convicted on three separate cocaine distribution charges. All four appellants sought, and were denied, the opportunity to cross-examine live witnesses at sentencing. Appellants now appeal that ruling. For the reasons stated below, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
This case involves the transportation of cocaine from Lowell, Massachusetts, and Harrison, New Jersey, to Portland, Maine, where it was subsequently sold. Appellant Ramirez-Fernandez was the contact and ring leader in Portland. Appellant Zuleta-Alvarez served as a source in Lowell and later assisted distribution in Portland. Appellants Guthzeit and West acted as retail distributors in and around Portland.
All four appellants were tried and convicted in August 1989. Sentencing occurred on November 16, 1989. At the sentencing hearing, the government introduced, over appellants' objections, transcripts of the testimony of several trial and grand jury witnesses who were not present for cross-examination. The central issue at sentencing was the amount of cocaine used to arrive at the base offense level. Appellants argued then, and continue to argue now, that the method used for determining the amount of cocaine involved was inaccurate and resulted in double and triple counting.
The court arrived at a base offense level of 32, with a Guideline sentencing range of 121-151 months. Appellants contend that had the amounts of cocaine been accurately counted, the proper base offense level would have been only 26, resulting in a significantly shorter period of incarceration.
Because appellants contend that the government's calculations were unreliable, they urge this court to find that the sentencing court erred in not compelling the production of live witnesses subject to cross-examination.
The Sentencing Guidelines provide:
When any factor important to the sentencing determination is reasonably in dispute, the parties shall be given an adequate opportunity to present information to the court regarding that factor. In resolving any reasonable dispute concerning a factor important to the sentencing determination, the court may consider relevant information without regard to its...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
US v. Patriarca, Cr. No. 89-289-WF.
...other information relating to any alleged factual inaccuracy contained in it") (emphasis added); see also United States v. Zuleta-Alvarez, 922 F.2d 33, 35-36 (1st Cir. 1990), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 111 S.Ct. 2039, 114 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991). Thus, I have all the evidence, briefing and argu......
-
U.S. v. Sepulveda, s. 92-1362
...in the facts of the case. See, e.g., United States v. Shattuck, 961 F.2d 1012, 1014-15 (1st Cir.1992); United States v. Zuleta-Alvarez, 922 F.2d 33, 37 (1st Cir.1990), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 111 S.Ct. 2039, 114 L.Ed.2d 123 These salutary precepts are dispositive here. Full deference i......
-
U.S. v. Miell, CR 07–101–MWB.
...its probable accuracy. Watts, 519 U.S. at 157, 117 S.Ct. 633; Nichols, 511 U.S. at 748, 114 S.Ct. 1921; United States v. Zuleta–Alvarez, 922 F.2d 33 (1st Cir.1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 927, 111 S.Ct. 2039, 114 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991); United States v. Beaulieu, 893 F.2d 1177 (10th Cir.), cert......
-
U.S. v. Rodriguez-Pacheco, 05-1815.
...the child is a real child for sentencing purposes. See U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3 (2002) (commentary); see also United States v. Zuleta-Alvarez, 922 F.2d 33, 37 (1st In Nolan, this circuit rejected a per se rule that the government must produce expert testimony in addition to the images themselves, i......
-
U.S. v. Miell, No. CR 07–101–MWB.
...its probable accuracy. Watts, 519 U.S. at 157, 117 S.Ct. 633; Nichols, 511 U.S. at 748, 114 S.Ct. 1921; United States v. Zuleta–Alvarez, 922 F.2d 33 (1st Cir.1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 927, 111 S.Ct. 2039, 114 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991); United States v. Beaulieu, 893 F.2d 1177 (10th Cir.), cert......
-
US v. Patriarca, Cr. No. 89-289-WF.
...other information relating to any alleged factual inaccuracy contained in it") (emphasis added); see also United States v. Zuleta-Alvarez, 922 F.2d 33, 35-36 (1st Cir. 1990), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 111 S.Ct. 2039, 114 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991). Thus, I have all the evidence, briefing and argu......
-
U.S. v. Sepulveda, Nos. 92-1362
...in the facts of the case. See, e.g., United States v. Shattuck, 961 F.2d 1012, 1014-15 (1st Cir.1992); United States v. Zuleta-Alvarez, 922 F.2d 33, 37 (1st Cir.1990), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 111 S.Ct. 2039, 114 L.Ed.2d 123 These salutary precepts are dispositive here. Full deference i......
-
U.S. v. Rodriguez-Pacheco, No. 05-1815.
...the child is a real child for sentencing purposes. See U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3 (2002) (commentary); see also United States v. Zuleta-Alvarez, 922 F.2d 33, 37 (1st In Nolan, this circuit rejected a per se rule that the government must produce expert testimony in addition to the images themselves, i......