United States v. Docampo

Summary

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed John Andrew Docampo Jr.'s convictions and 270-month sentence arising from a federal sting operation involving an attempted armed robbery of a fictional cocaine stash house. The court held that the admission of hearsay concerning a threat to a witness was harmless, and upheld the obstruction-of-justice enhancement and denial of a minor-role reduction. The court also concluded that the sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable, including in comparison with the sentences received by other conspirators.

Holdings

1. The district court abused its discretion by admitting Lorenzo's testimony about the witness's girlfriend's out-of-court statement because the government failed to establish an applicable hearsay exclusion or exception, but the error was harmless and did not warrant reversal.
2. The Eleventh Circuit did not recognize sentencing factor manipulation as a defense or basis for reducing Docampo's sentence, and Docampo failed to show the extraordinary government misconduct required even if such a reduction were available.
3. The district court properly applied a two-level obstruction-of-justice enhancement based on the threatening phone call because the hearsay evidence relied upon at sentencing had sufficient indicia of reliability.
4. Docampo was not entitled to a minor- or minimal-participant reduction because the district court properly considered his firearm possession and found that he was not less culpable than most other participants.
5. The 270-month sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable, and the disparities between Docampo's sentence and the sentences of cooperating federal defendants and state defendants did not establish an unwarranted disparity under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6).

Questions Presented

1. Whether the admission of testimony recounting the witness's girlfriend's statement about Docampo's threat was inadmissible hearsay and, if so, whether the error required reversal.
2. Whether the government engaged in sentencing factor manipulation warranting a sentence below the statutory mandatory minimum.
3. Whether the district court properly applied an obstruction-of-justice enhancement based on hearsay evidence concerning Docampo's threatening phone call.
4. Whether Docampo was entitled to a minor-role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2.
5. Whether Docampo's 270-month sentence was procedurally or substantively unreasonable because of inadequate consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and disparities between his sentence and those of other participants.

Disposition

affirmed