FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
MAINE [Hon. John A. Woodcock, Jr., U.S. District Judge]
William S. Maddox on brief for appellant.
R. Aframe, Assistant United States Attorney, District of New
Hampshire, and Emily Gray Rice, United States Attorney,
District of New Hampshire, on brief for appellee.
Howard, Chief Judge, Selya and Thompson, Circuit Judges.
Jowenky Nuñez challenges the sentence imposed
following his guilty plea to a charge of conspiracy to
possess with intent to distribute 28 grams or more of cocaine
base (crack cocaine). See 21 U.S.C. §§
841(a)(1), 846. He raises three discrete claims of error,
implicating a sentencing enhancement for his leadership role
in the offense, a sentencing enhancement for his possession
of a firearm during and in furtherance of a drug-trafficking
crime, and the substantive reasonableness of his sentence.
Finding these claims of error unpersuasive, we affirm.
appeal follows a guilty plea, we draw the facts from the
change-of-plea colloquy, the plea agreement, the uncontested
portions of the second revised presentence investigation
report (PSI Report), and the transcript of the two-day
disposition hearing. See United States v.
Almonte-Nuñez, 771 F.3d 84, 86 (1st Cir.
appellant was arrested on February 2, 2012, and charged with
conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to
distribute 28 grams or more of cocaine base, as well as
possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking
offense. These charges arose out of a long and thorough
investigation, spearheaded by the Drug Enforcement
Administration, into drug-trafficking activities in Bangor,
Maine. The appellant originally maintained his innocence but
- on January 18, 2013 - he pleaded guilty to the conspiracy
disposition hearing spread over two separate days, the
appellant identified three purported inaccuracies in the PSI
Report. First, he contested the finding that he served as a
manager of the enterprise and, consequently, he objected to
the proposed aggravating role enhancement. Second, he
contested the finding that he carried a firearm with him to
make drug deliveries and, consequently, objected to the
proposed two-level enhancement for possession of a firearm in
the course of the crime of conviction. Third, he contested
the accuracy of the PSI Report's drug-quantity
district court acknowledged and discussed each objection. In
rejecting the appellant's first objection, the court
reviewed testimony from several coconspirators and pointed
specifically to uncontradicted testimony from Dawlin Cabrera
(the ringleader of the conspiracy) to the effect that the
appellant was the person who kept him updated on sales and
to the weapons enhancement, the court agreed with the
appellant that the government had not sufficiently tied the
gun mentioned in the PSI Report to the appellant and the
crime of conviction. However, the court accepted the
government's proffer of the appellant's own testimony
during a coconspirator's trial, indicating that he (the
appellant) possessed a different gun while conducting the
conspiracy's business. This newly introduced evidence,
the court concluded, justified the weapons enhancement.
appellant enjoyed more success with his final plaint. The
district court accepted his (somewhat reduced) drug-quantity
all was said and done, the court set the appellant's base
offense level at 32, see USSG §2D1.1(c)(4);
applied the two-level weapons enhancement, see id.
§2D1.1(b)(1); applied the three-level
role-in-the-offense enhancement, see id.
§3B1.1(b); and subtracted three levels for acceptance of
responsibility, see id. §3E1.1. These findings
yielded a total offense level of 34. The appellant's past
record placed him in ...