US v. Zayas-Rodriguez

Filing

OPINION issued by Sandra L. Lynch, Appellate Judge; David H. Souter,* Associate Supreme Court Justice and Bruce M. Selya, Appellate Judge. Unpublished. *of the Supreme Court of the United States, sitting by designation. [15-2060]

Case: 15-2060

Document: 00117106998

Page: 1

Date Filed: 01/18/2017

Entry ID: 6063115

Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter

United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 15-2060
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee,
v.
WILLIAM ZAYAS-RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant, Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. Aida M. Delgado-Colón, Chief U.S. District Judge]

Before
Lynch, Circuit Judge,
Souter, Associate Justice,*
and Selya, Circuit Judge.

Barbara J. Sweeney on brief for appellant.
Tiffany V. Monrose, Assistant United States Attorney, Mariana
E. Bauzá-Almonte, Assistant United States Attorney, Chief,
Appellate Division, and Rosa Emilia Rodríguez-Vélez, United States
Attorney, on brief for appellee.

January 18, 2017

*

Hon. David H. Souter, Associate Justice (Ret.) of the
Supreme Court of the United States, sitting by designation.

Case: 15-2060

Document: 00117106998

LYNCH,
guilty

to

Circuit Judge.

possession

trafficking

crime

imprisonment.

Page: 2

of

and

a

Date Filed: 01/18/2017

William Zayas-Rodriguez pled

firearm

received

Entry ID: 6063115

a

in

furtherance

sentence

of

of
70

a

drug

months'

We reject his challenges to the procedural and

substantive reasonableness of his sentence and affirm.
I.
On April 21, 2014, a police cruiser in Cayey, Puerto
Rico attempted to stop a car that appeared to have illegally tinted
windows.

The car sped off, but after a chase the police detained

it and identified its driver as Zayas-Rodriguez.

While checking

Zayas-Rodriguez's license and registration, an officer noticed a
pistol "in plain view, partially hidden under the [car's] front
passenger seat."

The car also contained $1,033 in cash, as well

as significant amounts of ammunition and controlled substances.
On September 4, 2014, Zayas-Rodriguez agreed to plead
guilty

to

possession

trafficking crime.

of

a

firearm

in

furtherance

See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i).

of

a

drug

That offense

triggers a mandatory minimum sentence of 60 months, id., and so 60
months was the advisory sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines,
see U.S.S.G. § 2K2.4(b) (providing that, for § 924(c) convictions,
"the guideline sentence is the minimum term of imprisonment").

In

the non-binding plea agreement, the government agreed to recommend
a 60-month sentence and to request dismissal of the other charges

- 2 -

Case: 15-2060

Document: 00117106998

at sentencing.

Page: 3

Date Filed: 01/18/2017

Entry ID: 6063115

The district court accepted the plea on October

15, 2014.
On August 25, 2015, at sentencing, Zayas-Rodriguez's
counsel did not object to any of the information in the PreSentence Report ("PSR"), and Zayas-Rodriguez himself confirmed
that the PSR's facts were accurate.

The district court, after

stating that it had "considered the sentencing factors under [18
U.S.C. §] 3553(a)," the plea agreement, and its obligation to
"impos[e] a sentence that [wa]s not harsher than necessary," chose
to impose a 70-month sentence.

The court explained that it had

taken into account Zayas-Rodriguez's numerous prior arrests and
convictions, as well as "the elements of the instant offense."
Zayas-Rodriguez timely appealed.
II.
Zayas-Rodriguez

claims

that

his

procedurally and substantively unreasonable.1
A.

sentence

was

both

His arguments fail.

Procedural Reasonableness
We need not resolve the parties' disagreement as to the

appropriate standard of review because there was no abuse of

1

As the government concedes, the plea agreement's waiverof-appeal clause does not bar this appeal because the district
court varied upward from the agreement's joint sentencing
recommendation. See United States v. Rivera-González, 776 F.3d
45, 48–49 (1st Cir. 2015).

- 3 -

Case: 15-2060

Document: 00117106998

Page: 4

Date Filed: 01/18/2017

Entry ID: 6063115

discretion, much less plain error, in the sentence's procedural
reasonableness.
First, Zayas-Rodriguez argues that his sentence was
procedurally

unreasonable

because

the

district

court

"extemporaneously" calculated a criminal history score without
giving him notice of the data or methodology used.

But the court

explicitly confirmed its awareness that "the provisions of Chapter
4 of the Sentencing Guidelines do not apply to . . . [§] 924(c)
violations," and when viewed in context, its calculation was merely
a remark meant to help illustrate, for § 3553(a) purposes, the
extensiveness of Zayas-Rodriguez's arrest record.

See United

States v. Flores-Machicote, 706 F.3d 16, 21 (1st Cir. 2013)
(observing

that

§

3553(a)(1)

instructs

sentencing

judges

consider the defendant's "history and characteristics").

to

And the

court had no obligation to give advance notice that it might choose
an upward variance based on facts contained in the PSR.

See

Irizarry v. United States, 553 U.S. 708, 713–14 (2008).
As a corollary to his first argument, Zayas-Rodriguez
argues next that the district court mischaracterized one of his
prior offenses as a "carjacking," when in fact the offense was an
illegal appropriation.
misunderstood

the

Even assuming arguendo that the court

precise

nature

of

that

prior

argument still falls short; any error was harmless.

offense,

the

Because the

district court's broader point was the extensiveness of the arrest

- 4 -

Case: 15-2060

Document: 00117106998

Page: 5

Date Filed: 01/18/2017

Entry ID: 6063115

record, we are satisfied that the court's misunderstanding, if
any, had no effect on the sentence.

See United States v. Alphas,

785 F.3d 775, 780 (1st Cir. 2015) (citing Williams v. United
States, 503 U.S. 193, 203 (1992)).
Finally, Zayas-Rodriguez argues that his sentence was
procedurally unreasonable because the district court gave undue
consideration to the effects of gun violence on Puerto Rico's
citizens.

But as we have repeatedly stated, a district court may

consider such issues as deterrence-related factors that help to
justify an upward variance, so long as the court does not "focus
too

much

on

[defendant]."

the

community

and

too

little

on

the

individual

Flores-Machicote, 706 F.3d at 24; see also, e.g.,

United States v. Pedroza-Orengo, 817 F.3d 829, 834 (1st Cir. 2016);
United States v. Pantojas-Cruz, 800 F.3d 54, 59-60 (1st Cir. 2015);
United States v. Narváez-Soto, 773 F.3d 282, 285–86 (1st Cir.
2014); United States v. Politano, 522 F.3d 69, 73–74 (1st Cir.
2008).

In Zayas-Rodriguez's case, the court appropriately tied

the community-based factors to the other § 3553(a) factors and to
his individual circumstances -- particularly the fact that the
police had found drugs, in addition to a firearm, when they
searched his car.
B.

Substantive Reasonableness
Zayas-Rodriguez

also

substantively unreasonable.

claims

that

his

sentence

was

Once again, we need not resolve any

- 5 -

Case: 15-2060

Document: 00117106998

Page: 6

Date Filed: 01/18/2017

Entry ID: 6063115

uncertainty over the appropriate standard of review2 because the
sentence was substantively reasonable under any standard.

The

district court's "ultimate responsibility [wa]s to articulate a
plausible rationale and arrive at a sensible result,"

United

States v. Carrasco-de-Jesús, 589 F.3d 22, 30 (1st Cir. 2009), and
it

met

those

Rodriguez's

obligations
extensive

by

plausibly

criminal

reasoning

history

and

that

the

Zayas-

"serious

combination" of weapons and drugs found in his car warranted a
modest upward variance from the mandatory minimum.

"That the

sentencing court chose not to attach to certain of the mitigating
factors

the

significance

that

[Zayas-Rodriguez]

deserved does not make the sentence unreasonable."

thinks

they

United States

v. Clogston, 662 F.3d 588, 593 (1st Cir. 2011).
III.
For the foregoing reasons, we affirm Zayas-Rodriguez's
sentence.

2

It is not settled whether "a failure to . . . object[]
in the district court to the substantive reasonableness of a
sentence begets plain error review" or abuse of discretion review.
United States v. Ruiz-Huertas, 792 F.3d 223, 228 (1st Cir.), cert.
denied, 136 S. Ct. 258 (2015).

- 6 -