United States v. Raul Hernandez

Eighth Circuit

United States v. Raul Hernandez

53 F.3d 335, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23340, 1995 WL 262379

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedMay 8, 1995

Docket94-2322

StatusPublished

This text of 53 F.3d 335 (United States v. Raul Hernandez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Raul Hernandez, 53 F.3d 335, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23340, 1995 WL 262379 (8th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

53 F.3d 335
NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Raul HERNANDEZ, Appellant.

No. 94-2322

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: May 3, 1995
Filed: May 8, 1995

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Raul Hernandez appeals the thirty-six-month sentence imposed by the District Court1 after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute one kilogram of cocaine. For reversal, Hernandez challenges only the denial of a two-level reduction in offense level for being a minor participant.

The Guidelines provide "a range of adjustments for a defendant who plays a part in committing the offense that makes him substantially less culpable than the average participant." U.S.S.G. Sec. 3B1.2, comment. (backg'd.) (Nov. 1994). A "minor participant" is one "who is less culpable than most other participants, but whose role could not be described as minimal." Id. Sec. 3B1.2, comment. (n.3). We review the denial of a minor-role reduction for clear error, United States v. Rayner, 2 F.3d 286, 288 (8th Cir. 1993), and conclude the District Court did not clearly err in denying Hernandez's request for the reduction. Although Hernandez asserts he was not going to be reimbursed financially for his efforts, he introduced the participants to each other, arranged the transaction, orchestrated most of the details, made the necessary calls, accompanied his co-defendant to the transaction, and carried part of the purchase money.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

1

The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

53 F.3d 335
NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Raul HERNANDEZ, Appellant.

No. 94-2322

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: May 3, 1995
Filed: May 8, 1995

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Raul Hernandez appeals the thirty-six-month sentence imposed by the District Court1 after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute one kilogram of cocaine. For reversal, Hernandez challenges only the denial of a two-level reduction in offense level for being a minor participant.

The Guidelines provide "a range of adjustments for a defendant who plays a part in committing the offense that makes him substantially less culpable than the average participant." U.S.S.G. Sec. 3B1.2, comment. (backg'd.) (Nov. 1994). A "minor participant" is one "who is less culpable than most other participants, but whose role could not be described as minimal." Id. Sec. 3B1.2, comment. (n.3). We review the denial of a minor-role reduction for clear error, United States v. Rayner, 2 F.3d 286, 288 (8th Cir. 1993), and conclude the District Court did not clearly err in denying Hernandez's request for the reduction. Although Hernandez asserts he was not going to be reimbursed financially for his efforts, he introduced the participants to each other, arranged the transaction, orchestrated most of the details, made the necessary calls, accompanied his co-defendant to the transaction, and carried part of the purchase money.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

1

The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 F.3d 335, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23340, 1995 WL 262379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-raul-hernandez-ca8-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack