United States v. Hugo Oziel Benavides

United States v. Benavides · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · August 4, 2026 · No. 25-1054

Summary

The Sixth Circuit affirmed Hugo Benavides’s 96-month, within-Guidelines sentence for conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine. The court upheld application of the firearms enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1), denial of the zero-point offender reduction under § 4C1.1(a), and the sentence’s substantive reasonableness. The court also rejected Benavides’s arguments concerning withdrawal from the conspiracy and disparity with a codefendant’s sentence.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Joan L. Larsen; Richard Allen Griffin; Chad A. Readler
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
August 4, 2026
Docket number
25-1054
Procedural posture
Benavides pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine. The district court applied a firearms enhancement, denied a zero-point offender reduction, and imposed a within-Guidelines sentence of 96 months. Benavides appealed, challenging only his sentence.
Standard of review
The firearms-enhancement possession element is reviewed for clear error, while whether the firearm was possessed during relevant conduct is reviewed de novo. Legal determinations concerning the § 4C1.1 reduction are reviewed de novo and factual findings for clear error. A substantive-reasonableness challenge is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and a within-Guidelines sentence is presumed reasonable.
Precedential value
Published; recommended for publication under Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b).
Parties
Hugo Oziel Benavides v. United States of America
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

sentencing guidelinessentencingstandard of reviewappellate procedurecriminal procedure

Practice areas

federal criminal lawcriminal sentencingappellate review

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court properly applied the two-level dangerous-weapon enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1).
  2. Whether the district court properly denied Benavides the two-level zero-point offender reduction under U.S.S.G. § 4C1.1(a), including whether the defendant bears the burden of proving entitlement to the reduction.
  3. Whether Benavides’s within-Guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable.
  4. Whether the disparity between Benavides’s sentence and his codefendant’s sentence rendered Benavides’s sentence substantively unreasonable.

Holdings

  1. The district court properly applied the two-level firearms enhancement because Benavides possessed the firearms during relevant conduct to the cocaine conspiracy and failed to show that it was clearly improbable that the firearms were connected to the offense.
  2. The defendant bears the burden of establishing entitlement to the § 4C1.1(a) reduction, including proving that the defendant did not possess or otherwise handle a firearm or dangerous weapon in connection with the offense under § 4C1.1(a)(7).
  3. The within-Guidelines sentence was substantively reasonable and did not constitute an abuse of discretion.

Key quotations

We conclude that it is the defendant’s burden to show entitlement to the reduction. (p. 4)
For drug-related offenses, we often infer that a defendant’s firearm could or would be used to protect drugs or otherwise facilitate a drug transaction when the defendant keeps the weapon close to his drugs or drug paraphernalia. (p. 5)
The district court properly considered all of the factors, balanced them, and imposed a reasonable sentence. (p. 6)

Factual background

Benavides participated in a cocaine conspiracy in which cocaine was obtained near the United States-Mexico border and mailed to a purchaser through a postal-worker intermediary. On June 6, 2022, investigators confronted Benavides at his mother’s home, where he admitted possessing cocaine and allowed investigators to seize 2.7 grams; a subsequent search authorized by his mother uncovered three firearms. Benavides accepted responsibility for the cocaine and firearms, pleaded guilty to the conspiracy, and received a 96-month sentence.

Procedural history

A grand jury indicted Benavides and two codefendants for their roles in a cocaine conspiracy. Benavides pleaded guilty to one conspiracy count. At sentencing, the Western District of Michigan applied U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1), denied relief under U.S.S.G. § 4C1.1(a), and imposed a 96-month sentence within the advisory Guidelines range of 87 to 108 months. The Sixth Circuit affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…