LAW.coLAW.co

UNITED STATES v. DOMINGUEZ (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.2021-01-28No. No. 20-1168

Summary

Holding. The district court's application of the sentencing enhancement was affirmed.

Sergio Dominguez pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and was sentenced to 200 months in prison. At sentencing, the district court applied a two-level enhancement under the Sentencing Guidelines based on finding that Dominguez's offense involved importing methamphetamine from Mexico. The enhancement calculation produced an advisory guideline range of 210–262 months, and the judge imposed a sentence below that range.

Dominguez challenged the enhancement on appeal, arguing that testimony about his statements to a confidential informant and cooperating witness was unreliable because it constituted double hearsay and because one witness was not fluent in English. He also claimed the district court erred in finding his trips to Mexico were connected to drug importation. The court rejected both arguments, finding that hearsay evidence at sentencing need only meet a reliability standard rather than comply with formal evidentiary rules, and that substantial corroborating evidence supported the judge's finding that Dominguez was affiliated with the Sinaloa cartel and was importing drugs.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

  • Admissibility and reliability of hearsay evidence at sentencing proceedings
  • Whether GPS tracking, controlled buys, and witness testimony sufficiently established drug importation for purposes of sentencing enhancement
  • Clear error review standard for factual findings regarding defendant's travel to Mexico

Procedural posture

Dominguez appealed the district court's application of a two-level sentencing enhancement based on drug importation.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

[Unpublished]

Sergio Dominguez pled guilty to conspiring to distribute 50 grams or more of actual methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1), and 846. At sentencing, the district court

1

applied a two-level enhancement under § 2D1.1(b)(5) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines because Dominguezs offense involved the importation of methamphetamine, which resulted in an advisory Guidelines range of 210-262 months’ imprisonment. The district court varied downward and sentenced Dominguez to a term of 200 months’ imprisonment. Dominguez appeals the district courts application of the enhancement. We affirm.

Section 2D1.1(b)(5) provides for a two-level enhancement if “the offense involved the importation of ․ methamphetamine” and “the defendant is not subject to an adjustment under § 3B1.2 (Mitigating Role).”

2

At sentencing, the district court took evidence about the application of the enhancement, including testimony from Brandon Kirkley (“Kirkley”) of the Grand Island Police Department, who was one of the investigators in Dominguezs case.

Kirkley testified that law enforcement worked with a confidential informant (“CI”) who made thirteen controlled buys from Dominguez and his co-conspirators. In the course of his dealings with the CI, Dominguez related that he was working with the Sinaloa drug cartel in Mexico. Another cooperating individual reported that Dominguez had informed him the drugs sold in Grand Island came from Sinaloa. In addition, law enforcement placed a GPS tracker on Dominguezs car, which showed the car was in Mexico three times during the investigation and that on two of those occasions controlled buys took place shortly thereafter. Kirkley also testified that the investigation failed to identify any conspirator other than Dominguez who made frequent trips to the southwest United States and Mexico. Finally, the court received into evidence three exhibits containing a summary of Dominguezs travel to Mexico from the GPS tracker, and summaries of two conversations the CI had while making controlled buys from the cooperating individual and Dominguez. Based on this evidence, the district court found the two-level increase under § 2D1.1(b)(5) was warranted.

Dominguez argues on appeal that Kirkleys testimony about his statements to the CI and the cooperating individual is unreliable because it is double hearsay and because the cooperating individual was not fluent in English. These arguments are unavailing because the Rules of Evidence do not apply to sentencing proceedings, and “hearsay evidence, even double hearsay, can be used at sentencing proceedings if it bears sufficient indicia of reliability to support its probable accuracy.” United States v. Ngombwa, 893 F.3d 546, 557 (8th Cir. 2018) (cleaned up). As a general principle, when hearsay evidence at sentencing is corroborated, it is sufficiently reliable. Id. There is ample corroborating evidence in the record to support the district courts finding that Dominguez was affiliated with the Sinaloa cartel and that he was importing drugs into the United States from Mexico. There is no indication in the record of communication difficulties between law enforcement and the cooperating witness. The hearsay evidence was sufficiently reliable to be considered by the court when determining whether the sentencing enhancement was applicable.

Dominguez also argues the district court erred in finding his trips to Mexico were related to the importation of methamphetamine. Findings of fact are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Rivera-Mendoza, 682 F.3d 730, 733 (8th Cir. 2012). “Reversal under clearly erroneous review requires a ‘definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’ ” Id. (quoting United States v. Martinez, 446 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir. 2006)). Although Dominguez offered an innocent explanation for his presence in Mexico, the district court reasonably made a determination that Kirkleys testimony was more credible than the claim that Dominguez trips were to visit family.

We affirm the judgment of the district court.

FOOTNOTES

1

.   The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

2

.   Dominguez did not receive a mitigating role reduction.

PER CURIAM.