APPEAL
FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
PUERTO RICO [Hon. Aida M. Delgado-Colón, U.S. District
Judge]
Maria
Soledad Ramirez-Becerra and Maria Soledad-Ramirez Becerra Law
Office on brief for appellant.
Rosa
Emilia Rodríguez-Vélez, United States Attorney,
Mariana E. Bauzá-Almonte, Assistant United States
Attorney, Chief, Appellate Division, and John A. Mathews II,
Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
Before
Lynch, Selya and Kayatta, Circuit Judges.
SELYA,
CIRCUIT JUDGE.
Defendant-appellant
Jayson Rentas-Muñiz pleaded guilty to conspiring to
possess with intent to distribute cocaine base (crack
cocaine) and to possessing a firearm in furtherance of a
drug-trafficking crime. The district court sentenced him to a
202-month term of immurement on the drug-conspiracy charge
and a sixty-month term of immurement on the firearms charge,
stipulating that those prison terms would run consecutive to
one another and to the undischarged portions of multiple
Puerto Rico sentences that he was then serving. Before us,
the appellant primarily challenges the district court's
determination to run the federal sentences consecutive to the
Puerto Rico sentences previously imposed. After careful
consideration, we affirm.
I.
BACKGROUND
Since
this appeal follows a guilty plea, we draw the relevant facts
from the plea agreement (the Agreement), the change-of-plea
colloquy, the undisputed portions of the presentence
investigation report (PSI Report), and the sentencing
transcript. See United States v. Nuñez, 852
F.3d 141, 143 (1st Cir. 2017); United States v.
Dávila-González, 595 F.3d 42, 45 (1st Cir.
2010).
The
appellant is no stranger to the judicial system. Going back
in time, he was convicted in Puerto Rico of attempted
aggravated burglary in 2000, robbery and unlicensed use of a
weapon in 2002, and conspiracy against a judicial officer in
2006. He continued to operate on the wrong side of the law
and, by 2012, had become engaged in a conspiracy to
distribute cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin, and marijuana in
and around Ponce, Puerto Rico. During this phase of his
criminal career, the appellant sold drugs, served as an
enforcer for the drug ring, and assisted in the storage of
contraband. Separately, he was involved (on November 30,
2012) in the premeditated murder of a high-school student,
Juan Ruiz-Vega.
These
chickens ultimately came home to roost: the appellant was
charged in the Puerto Rico courts and convicted of a laundry
list of crimes. He was sentenced to multiple terms of
imprisonment, [1] including ninety-nine years for murder,
ten years for attempted murder, thirty years for the unlawful
use of firearms, and one year for the unlawful distribution
and possession of controlled substances. These sentences were
ordered to run consecutive to one another.
On
September 4, 2013, a federal grand jury in the District of
Puerto Rico charged the appellant - who was then incarcerated
in consequence of his state crimes - with conspiring to
possess with intent to distribute in excess of 280 grams of
cocaine base and detectable amounts of cocaine, heroin, and
marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1)
and 846 (count 1) and possessing a firearm in furtherance of
a drug-trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §
924(c) (count 2). About two months later, the appellant
pleaded guilty to both counts pursuant to the Agreement. As
part of the Agreement, the appellant stipulated to having
handled between 112 and 196 grams of crack cocaine, and both
sides agreed that the appellant's drug-distribution
convictions in the Puerto Rico courts should be considered
overt acts with respect to the federal drug-conspiracy
charge. The parties jointly recommended a sixty-month
sentence on count one to run consecutive to a sixty-month
mandatory minimum sentence on count two. The Agreement did
not address whether the federal sentences should run
consecutive to or concurrent with the state sentences.
The
parties agree that the November 2014 edition of the
sentencing guidelines applies in this case. Using that
version of the guidelines, the PSI Report recommended that
the appellant's base offense level be adjusted upward to
reflect his involvement in Ruiz-Vegas's murder - an
adjustment that would have yielded a guideline sentencing
range of 360 to 480 months. See USSG
§§2A1.1, 2D1.1(d)(1). At the disposition hearing,
the district court declined to treat the Ruiz-Vega murder as
relevant conduct, see id. §1B1.3, and
therefore eschewed the murder cross-reference. But since the
appellant had at least two prior felony convictions for
crimes of violence, the court concluded that he was a career
offender, see id. §4B1.1 - a determination that
resulted in a guideline range of 262 to 327 months. The court
proceeded to impose a below-the-range sentence of 202 months
on count one and a mandatory minimum sentence of sixty months
on count two, with these sentences to run consecutive to one
another and to the undischarged portions of the state
sentences.
This
timely appeal ensued. Although the Agreement contains a
waiver-of-appeal provision, the government concedes - as it
must - that this appeal falls outside the margins of that
provision.
II.
...