United States v. Dure
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
United States v. Dure, 181 F.3d 81 (1st Cir. 1999)
United States v. Dure
Opinion
Per Curiam.
Upon careful review of the briefs and record, we conclude that the district court did not
clearly err in denying defendant's request for an adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2
(mitigating role in offense). On the facts before it, the district court reasonably concluded
that the drug trafficking offense was a "joint venture" that "would not have occurred without
[defendant's] participation." Even though defendant may have been less culpable than his
joint venture partner, still defendant was not "less culpable than the average participant" in
similar drug trafficking conspiracies, [*2] and so he was not entitled to any adjustment. See
United States v. Brandon, 17 F.3d 409, 460 (1st Cir. 1994).
Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
Reference
- Cited By
- 18 cases
- Status
- Published