United States v. Cesar Vera

USCA11 Case: 25-12178 Document: 32-1 Date Filed: 04/24/2026 Page: 1 of 3

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-12178 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CESAR DANIEL PEREZ VERA, a.k.a. Cesar Daniel Perez Vera Darwin, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:24-cr-00500-SDM-TGW-3 ____________________ Before JILL PRYOR, NEWSOM, and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: Cesar Perez Vera appeals his 108-month sentence for con- spiracy to possess with intent to distribute five or more kilograms USCA11 Case: 25-12178 Document: 32-1 Date Filed: 04/24/2026 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 25-12178 of cocaine while on board a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and aiding and abetting possession of five or more kilograms of cocaine with intent to distribute. He argues that the district court imposed a procedurally unreasonable sentence when it failed to apply a minor-role reduction in calculating his offense level and advisory sentencing range. We affirm the district court.

I We review the district court’s finding that a defendant did not merit a minor-rule adjustment for clear error. United States v. De Varon, 175 F.3d 930, 937 (11th Cir. 1999) (en banc). The defend- ant has the burden of proving his minor role in the offense by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. at 939. The district court has “considerable discretion” in determining whether a role reduction is appropriate. United States v. Boyd, 291 F.3d 1274, 1277–78 (11th Cir. 2002). So long as the court’s decision is “supported by the rec- ord and does not involve a misapplication of a rule of law,” the “choice between ‘two permissible views of the evidence’” as to the defendant’s role in the offense will rarely constitute clear error. De Varon, 175 F.3d at 945 (emphasis omitted).

Section 3B1.2 of the Sentencing Guidelines provides for a two-level reduction if a defendant was a minor participant in the criminal activity. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). A minor participant is some- one “who is less culpable than most other participants in the crim- inal activity, but whose role could not be described as minimal.”

United States v. Gruezo, 66 F.4th 1284, 1293 (11th Cir. 2023) (quoting U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. 5). The determination of whether to apply a USCA11 Case: 25-12178 Document: 32-1 Date Filed: 04/24/2026 Page: 3 of 3

25-12178 Opinion of the Court 3 minor-role adjustment is based on the “totality of the circum- stances.” United States v. Cruickshank, 837 F.3d 1182, 1195 (11th Cir. 2016) (citing De Varon, 175 F.3d at 945).

Here, the district court did not clearly err. Perez Vera argues that there was no evidence that he took a leadership role in the criminal venture, understood its scope and structure, or had any financial benefit tied to success of the criminal conspiracy. But the burden of proof here rests with Perez Vera, not the government.

See De Varon, 175 F.3d at 939. And the government was able to show that Perez Vera knew the vessel was carrying cocaine before it left the shore, served as a crew member on it, and willingly agreed to smuggle the cocaine through international waters to dis- tribute it to others. We’ve said before that one’s “involve- ment . . . as a crewmember of a vessel that was smuggling a large quantity of drugs . . . [is] serious and important enough to warrant the denial of a minor-rule reduction under § 3B1.2.” Gruezo, 66 F.4th at 1294. It was sufficient that the defendant “knowingly par- ticipated in the illegal transportation of a large quantity of cocaine, he and his transportation role were important to that scheme, and he was held accountable for that conduct only.” Id. So too here.

AFFIRMED.