Miguel Caro Quintero Sentencing Hearing Transcript

Case 1:90-cr-00130-PAB Document 337 Filed 02/25/10 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 42
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
2
Criminal Action Nos. 90-CR-00130-PAB
3 09-CR-00367-PAB
4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
5 Plaintiff,
6 vs.
7 MIGUEL ANGEL CARO-QUINTERO,
8 Defendant.
_______________________________________________________________
9
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT
10 Sentencing
_______________________________________________________________
11
12 Proceedings before the HONORABLE PHILIP A. BRIMMER,
13 Judge, United States District Court for the District of
14 Colorado, commencing at 10:05 a.m., on the 4th day of
15 February, 2010, in Courtroom A701, United States Courthouse,
16 Denver, Colorado.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 Proceeding Recorded by Mechanical Stenography, Transcription

Produced via Computer by Janet M. Coppock, 901 19th Street,
25 Room A257, Denver, Colorado, 80294, (303) 893-2835
2
1 APPEARANCES
2 Mark J. Barrett, Susan Knox, Guy Till and Stephanie
3 Podolak, Assistant United States Attorneys, 1225 17th Street,
4 Suite 700, Denver, CO 80202, appearing for the plaintiff.
5 Walter B. Nash, III of Nash & Kirchner, P.C.,
6 P.O. Box 2310, Tucson, AZ 85702;
7 Stephen G. Ralls, Law Offices of Stephen G. Ralls,
8 273 South Scott Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85701; and
9 John M. Richilano of Richilano Shea, LLC,
10 1800 15th Street, #101, Denver, CO 80202, appearing for the
11 Defendant.
12 PROCEEDINGS
13 THE COURT: The matters before the Court are United
14 States of America v. Miguel Angel Caro-Quintero, Case 90-CR-130
15 and also Case No. 09-CR-367, which is a Rule 20 transfer case
16 from the District of Arizona. The District of Arizona number
17 was 94-205-TUC.
18 I will take entries of appearance, please.
19 MR. BARRETT: Good morning, Your Honor. Assistant
20 United States Attorney Mark Barrett on behalf of the
21 government. With me is Assistant United States Attorney Susan
22 Knox. Also in the courtroom in front of the bar is Assistant
23 United States Attorney Guy Till and Assistant United States
24 Attorney Stephanie Podolak.
25 If you would like, I would introduce the people at the

3
1 counsel table as well.
2 THE COURT: Yes, please.
3 MR. BARRETT: Good morning, Your Honor. To my left is
4 Secret Service Agent Mike Reddy. Next to him is retired DEA
5 Special Agent Steve Sperry. The gentleman to my right next to
6 Ms. Knox is FBI Special Agent John Patanisi, and DEA Special
7 Agent Bruce Fralick. At the table behind us is DEA intel
8 analyst Paul Duval and next to him is FBI Special Agent Kim
9 Buchanan.
10 THE COURT: Thank you. And good morning to each of
11 you.
12 On behalf of Mr. Caro-Quintero?
13 MR. NASH: Good morning, Your Honor. Walter Nash. I
14 am appearing this morning on behalf of Miguel Angel
15 Caro-Quintero along with John Richilano and Steven Ralls. He
16 is present, in custody, and he is being assisted by the
17 interpreter.
18 THE COURT: Thank you. Good morning to each of you.
19 (Interpreters were sworn.)
20 INTERPRETER CAHILL: I do.
21 INTERPRETER BAHR: I do.
22 THE COURT: Thank you very much. We are here for a
23 sentencing pursuant to Mr. Caro-Quintero's pleas of guilty in
24 the two cases that I have mentioned. The parties have filed on
25 behalf of Mr. Caro-Quintero a sentencing memorandum, guideline

4
1 objection and request for a variant sentence. However, as
2 things have turned out, there is no disagreement as to the
3 advisory guideline.
4 Mr. Barrett, has the United States received a copy of
5 the Presentence Investigation Report and also the addendum, as
6 well as the sentencing memorandum and the supplement to that
7 filed by Mr. Caro-Quintero?
8 MR. BARRETT: We have, Your Honor.
9 THE COURT: And the United States responded to the
10 request for a variant sentence.
11 Any other briefs or motions or objections on behalf of
12 the United States?
13 MR. BARRETT: No, Your Honor.
14 THE COURT: Thank you.
15 Mr. Nash, on behalf of Mr. Caro-Quintero, any
16 additional filings in the way of objections or corrections to
17 the presentence investigation?
18 MR. NASH: Not as to those elements, Your Honor.
19 There is a very brief housekeeping matter that Mr. Barrett and
20 I would like to take up at side bar.
21 THE COURT: Yes. Please approach.
22 (Bench conference was sealed.)
23 (In open court:)
24 THE COURT: Mr. Nash, anything else by way of
25 objection or supplementation to any of the sentencing

5
1 information on behalf of Mr. Caro-Quintero?
2 MR. NASH: No, sir.
3 THE COURT: Thank you. As I indicated before, the
4 parties do not have any objection to the advisory guideline
5 range as recounted in the Presentence Investigation Report by
6 the probation department. Given that fact, let me review that
7 calculation at this point.
8 The base offense level is 38 which represents a
9 finding of more than 30,000 kilograms of marijuana, which is at
10 the top of the drug quantity table. The Court agrees with the
11 probation department that a two-level enhancement for
12 possession of a firearm is not supported; and, therefore, no
13 enhancement will be based upon that. However, given the fact
14 that the offenses involve the use of an aircraft, a two-level
15 enhancement is appropriate. The Court also agrees that because
16 the defendant was an organizer, a leader of criminal activity,
17 a four-level enhancement is appropriate meaning that the
18 adjusted offense level for the defendant is 44. Given the fact
19 that he has accepted responsibility in this case, a three-level
20 reduction is appropriate meaning that his total offense level
21 is 41.
22 The Court agrees that Mr. Caro-Quintero has a Criminal
23 History Category I meaning that his advisory guideline range
24 works out as follows: Based on an offense level of 41 and
25 Criminal History Category of I, the guideline range for

6
1 imprisonment is 324 months to 405 months. However, given the
2 fact that in the Colorado case, which is 90-CR-130, the maximum
3 statutory sentence for Count 1 is 20 years and in the Arizona
4 case it is five years, the guideline sentence becomes 300
5 months for both cases because the counts grew.
6 The Court at this time indicates that it will accept
7 the parties' plea agreement which because that plea agreement
8 is a 11(c)(1)(C) plea, it requires the Court to sentence
9 Mr. Caro-Quintero within those sentencing ranges put forth in
10 the plea agreement, namely between 10 years and 20 years as to
11 both cases.
12 That having been said, I will hear argument on behalf
13 of Mr. Caro-Quintero first as to the motion for variant
14 sentence. And if you would, Mr. Nash, include your arguments
15 as to the sentence as well. In other words, we will take up
16 both what the total sentence should be and also the motion for
17 a variant sentence. I will then have the United States respond
18 to that. And then finally if Mr. Caro-Quintero wishes to
19 address the Court regarding sentencing, I will hear from him.
20 MR. NASH: May Mr. Caro-Quintero remain seated at
21 counsel table during my remarks?
22 THE COURT: He may.
23 MR. NASH: Thank you, sir. I know that the Court has
24 received some extensive documents from us, the initial
25 sentencing memorandum and then the reply to what the government

7
1 had filed. And you also have the benefit of a very
2 comprehensive, well written Presentence Investigation Report.
3 I certainly don't want to cover all those issues again here
4 today. I do, however, want to address three issues, one of
5 them extremely briefly because I believe they are the core of
6 some of the sentencing calculations and, in particular, the
7 variant sentences that we have asked for.
8 Those are initially the matter of the three-year
9 credit for the time that Mr. Caro-Quintero spent in jail in
10 Mexico on the Mexican offense which was the possession of a
11 gun. And I need to correct one aspect of our initial filing.
12 I had indicated there that the other co-defendant who was a
13 government cooperator had done time in Mexico and that I was
14 unsure -- I think I used the word we were unsure as to how that
15 was credited in Mexico.
16 The government's counsel and I have had a chance to
17 talk and indeed back in the fall of last year they had chased
18 that issue down and advised me about it, and I simply forgot
19 about it when I wrote the memo. The reality of that individual
20 sentence is he served a substantial period in Mexico. All of
21 the time served was indeed the product of a Mexican violation.
22 All of that time was indeed credited to a Mexican sentence.
23 That simply fleshes out the particulars of that situation.
24 What we have urged to the Court is that you follow the
25 recommendation of the Presentence Report and in essence come to

8
1 your decision as to what the sentence should be and then deduct
2 the three years or 36 months therefrom in imposing what would
3 be the final sentence herein. It is exactly what was done for
4 a similarly situated defendant. The particulars of that and
5 the reasons supporting the recommendation of Ms. Ricca are
6 outlined in some detail in her report, and I will not repeat
7 them here today.
8 The government's position is a simple one. They say
9 that you do not have the legal authority to do that. And in
10 point of fact, you don't, except that the notion of a variant
11 sentence gives you the authority to reach the same point. 18
12 3585 is clear on its face in providing that if an individual
13 serves out-of-country time, they don't get credit against a BOP
14 sentence if that time was credited against any foreign
15 sentence. The same situation applied to the co-defendant and
16 we ask the Court to apply the same sentencing consideration to
17 Mr. Caro-Quintero.
18 The government's position is a bit ironic in view of
19 how they treated the other individual because his agreement
20 expressly provided that the court had the jurisdiction to do
21 that. The problem that we face is if you follow what the
22 government has suggested, in other words, wait to see what BOP
23 is going to do, and if BOP does not follow what we believe the
24 law to be and what the probation officer believes the law to
25 be, Mr. Caro-Quintero is left without a remedy. If you in

9
1 effect say, as the government urges, maybe the Bureau of
2 Prisons will not follow the law and will not give him credit
3 for it -- or excuse me, will give him credit for it and you
4 don't do it, then he has nowhere to go if BOP follows the law
5 and does not.
6 What we have asked the Court to do is what I have
7 outlined. I would ask if you choose to exercise your
8 discretion and to give him credit, like the co-defendant
9 received credit for that time, that your sentencing order will
10 clearly set out why you are doing it, and that you are doing it
11 based upon the fact that under the applicable law none of us
12 believe that the Bureau of Prisons will give him credit for
13 that time.
14 As I said in writing and as I will make the record
15 very clear here today, if indeed BOP does not follow the law
16 and does not follow the letter in the spirit of your order, we
17 have no objection to you modifying a sentence to correctly
18 reflect what your intent was. That puts the government in a
19 position of a no-lose posture and it avoids a difficult
20 situation of you entering an order based upon what you believe
21 BOP may do. If BOP does not do it, we would be left in essence
22 without a remedy.
23 The next issue I will touch on just very briefly to
24 clarify the point we raised in writing, and that is we talked
25 about in our initial written filing some comparative sentencing

10
1 with some co-defendants. And I identify them and I talk about
2 that in some detail in our pleading. The government quite
3 correctly pointed out in their response that those individuals
4 cooperated extensively with the government. We do not dispute
5 that. We don't deny that in any fashion. And we clearly
6 recognize that that is a substantial distinguishing factor when
7 one chooses to compare the sentence one person received with
8 the sentence another should receive. That's it.
9 That distinguishing factor which we recognize does not
10 change what people did and does not change their background and
11 does not change who they are. And those are the things I was
12 trying to illustrate in writing and to have the Court look at
13 when I wrote that in the initial filing.
14 Lastly, I want to discuss a little bit about the
15 conditions of confinement of this man. I want to break my
16 discussion into two categories because I do not believe we have
17 a disagreement on the first of them. The first of them is his
18 treatment to date, his past and contemporaneous treatment. The
19 second area would be prospective or future conditions of
20 confinement.
21 I will tell the Court that I have no dispute with the
22 notion that federal prison is not supposed to be a country
23 club. It is not supposed to be necessarily easy time for a
24 person to do. However, the way Miguel Caro-Quintero has been
25 treated thus far both in Mexico and the United States has been
11
1 extraordinary. It has been incredibly harsh and as far as we
2 can determine and the government and the BOP officials and
3 folks in the marshal's office without any real justification.
4 We have pointed out in writing and we have asked those
5 questions again more recently. Why is he being treated this
6 way? Why is he being classified with the worst of the worst?
7 And no one seems to have any answer. We as defense counsel can
8 speculate why administrative staff in BOP may be electing to
9 treat him that way, but no one, not even government's counsel
10 who have been very diligent in this case, have been able to
11 come up with a real hard and fast reason of this treatment.
12 His treatment in the main has been incredible
13 isolation. He has been in solitary confinement now for more
14 than eight years. Approximately seven years, two months of
15 that was served in atrocious conditions of confinement, which
16 Ms. Ricca's report details in writing, in Mexico. And he has
17 been in the United States for more than a year. The conditions
18 have been marginally better, but still he is isolated. We have
19 tried to point out, and I want to explain some more recent
20 developments here today, some of the other details in addition
21 to the incredible isolation that he has faced.
22 We have talked about housing conditions that were
23 literally intolerable. Defense counsel couldn't even stay in a
24 cell block where he was placed in Florence because the smell
25 was so bad. That has changed after we raised an issue.

12
1 Incredibly, BOP officials still are not giving
2 Mr. Caro-Quintero clothing. They still even after we raised
3 the issue are not giving him clean clothes. He is forced to
4 wash his own clothing every couple of days in his cell to try
5 to maintain some levels of hygiene and appropriate standards of
6 dress. He did get an extra pair of pants because one of the
7 other inmates, an orderly, felt sorry for what BOP was doing
8 and they gave him one extra pair of pants.
9 He has no contact with outside people. He is so
10 isolated and lonely he has indicated to us that he doesn't care
11 if the people contact is with folks that may present a danger
12 to him. He just yearns for actually being with other human
13 beings.
14 We detailed the other paucity of any physical contact
15 with his family. We tried to explain in writing that during
16 the entire year plus he has been in the United States, he got
17 two 15-minute phone calls with his family, one brief call to
18 his mother who in very poor health in Mexico. And he has been
19 told by BOP officials that he won't be allowed to call her
20 again.
21 You know, incredibly that he was even denied access to
22 counsel. BOP for in excess of a month denied his daily request
23 to speak with his lawyers even though we were in some pretty
24 intense presentence proceedings. He also -- he made those
25 requests and we, too, sent extensive written requests to folks

13
1 at BOP, and finally they allowed us to let us speak with our
2 client. Incredibly, in spite of the fact as of any writings
3 that we have cited to the Court, some of which of we submitted
4 to the Court and counsel, illustrate serious mental issues
5 follow when a person is kept away from human contact and
6 isolated.
7 Mr. Caro-Quintero I am sure in his records jacket says
8 that he has mental health visits. He explained to us that the
9 mental health visit consists of someone looking through an
10 opening in his cell, small opening in the door where he is held
11 in utter and complete isolation, and saying to him in broken
12 Spanish clearly indicative that they are not a fluent Spanish
13 speaker, Como estas, or how are you? With that they leave and
14 move on to the next inmate.
15 He has never had a counseling visit. He had has never
16 had any in depth evaluation. He has never had anyone deal with
17 the many adverse sequelae that inure to the detriment of the
18 defendant who is held in isolation. And no one disputes any of
19 those matters that we have raised in writing.
20 The government -- and I certainly do not mean to be
21 taking the government to task when I say the government has
22 told us that the government can't get information. Their hands
23 are tied by what BOP will tell them. But the government in
24 their reply, their response has indicated to us that common
25 sense tells us that it may be that BOP is doing this for two
14
1 reasons; (1), danger to others or (2), danger to
3 First, he has never presented a danger to anyone.
4 Ms. Ricca's report does a fine job in talking about what he has
5 done. Government's counsel has been very open, very honest and
6 very forthcoming with Ms. Ricca on how Mr. Caro-Quintero does
7 not present a danger to others. The issues of danger to him I
8 have addressed in writing. And I think I have explained all
9 the reasons why that argument simply has no place here for his
10 case, especially given the eight-plus years he has been in
11 custody.
12 The only point I would add here today is it simply
13 doesn't seem to make good sense, it doesn't seem to comport
14 with the minimum notions of fair treatment for a prison to
15 punish a potential victim exactly as badly as you would punish
16 the actual perpetrator.
17 Mr. Caro-Quintero has been housed alongside people who
18 killed other inmates. He has been housed alongside people who
19 killed guards. He has been housed with, in the words of one of
20 the articles we submitted to the court, the worst of the worst.
21 That hardly seems to be appropriate treatment if the goal is
22 really to protect him.
23 BOP has a number of facilities where individuals can
24 go if there is any thought of danger to them. There are
25 particular facilities where cooperators are sent. Oftentimes

15
1 they are placed in medical facilities because that is a place
2 where there is far less danger. The inmate population does not
3 present the kind of danger that exists in other places. BOP
4 has not chosen to do that. We respectfully believe that they
5 won't do it in the future.
6 I have talked about the results in writing and touched
7 on them here. No one really doubts them. The point I am
8 trying to make and why we seek the variant sentence on these
9 two grounds, past treatment or what we believe to be future
10 treatment, is that one does not simply look at the number
11 imposed for a sentence in determining whether it's appropriate
12 under 3553, but you also look at the kind of time a person
13 does. Time spent in a camp or facility with less arduous
14 conditions of confinement where you have access to counseling,
15 educational programs and interaction with other people, it's
16 far easier and passes far more quickly than time spent in
17 isolation and under some of the conditions that this man has
18 faced on an extended basis for close to a decade.
19 Two and a half years we respectfully submit under
20 these kind of conditions is really a worst sentence than five
21 years when an individual serves in a camp or a facility that
22 has better conditions of confinement. That is why we ask for a
23 variant sentence on that ground and the same reasoning applies
24 to future confinement. Let me move on to that.
25 The government has urged in its written filing that

16
1 they believe the Bureau of Prisons will be professional. They
2 will analyze this man's record of performance, his
3 institutional adjustment, if you will, and will treat him in a
4 fair fashion. And our prognosis is far darker. It is based
5 upon how this man has been treated for more than a year in the
6 United States to date.
7 Officials in the BOP have had ample time to see who he
8 is and what he is. And I think the reason for his mistreatment
9 comes from higher administrative levels. We can guess what
10 it's based on and I won't do that here today. I will tell the
11 Court again as we said in writing that line personnel at two
12 different BOP facilities have been extraordinary in their
13 praise of how well this man has behaved himself. He hasn't
14 done anything wrong or been impolite even let alone commit any
15 violations. They don't understand why he has been treated the
16 way he is being treated.
17 He was moved from Englewood where he was held in the
18 SHU to FCI Florence High. No one knows why that happened.
19 What we do know is that he is the only non-designated inmate
20 that is housed at Florence. And that, I think, is ample
21 justification and buttresses our claim that that is going to be
22 what's going to happen to him once he is designated. Indeed
23 the Presentence Report makes that same prognosis, that he is
24 going to continue to be held in isolation.
25 Things got worse. We even sent a very long letter to

17
1 administrative personnel at Florence and we sent a copy to the
2 U.S. Attorney's Office when he was first transferred. We
3 explained all of the arguable reasons to isolate him which we
4 have articulated in writing in our filing with the Court. We
5 explained why none of them seemed to apply yet his conditions
6 of confinement became even worse. That, I think, shows more
7 than anything else what's going to happen to this man in the
8 future. It's not guesswork on our part. It's based upon the
9 track record of how he has been treated for more than a year.
10 Shakespeare said in The Tempest I think something that
11 applies with full weight here today for this man and that is
12 that "The past is a prologue of the future." I would
13 respectfully urge that what is going to happen to this man is
14 exactly what Ms. Ricca predicts. He will be designated to a
15 very harsh facility despite his record and background. He will
16 continue to be held in isolation. The arduous conditions of
17 confinement will continue despite our best efforts. And we
18 urge that all of that constitutes a ground for a variance.
19 Let me conclude. I have gone on a bit longer than I
20 wanted to, sir, in view of what we have given you in writing.
21 One thing again I should clarify that government's counsel
22 learned just this morning and brought to our attention just
23 before we began is it appears as though he will receive credit,
24 statutory good time credit for what we believe will be
25 approximately four years separate from the three in the other

18
1 charge that he served in custody in Mexico, so I would correct
2 that aspect of my initial filing.
3 We all know what this man did, and I would suggest as
4 important we all know, as it's recited in the PSR, what he
5 didn't do. He is incredibly remorseful. His remorse to
6 defense counsel has been tangible. I think it was telegraphed
7 in the presentence interview and it comes across in his letter
8 to the Court.
9 Miguel has had a long time under terrible conditions
10 of confinement to really think about what he did, to consider
11 the poor decisions he made many, many years ago as a young man
12 and he squarely recognized those mistakes. He knows what it's
13 cost him and he knows what it's cost his family. And I would
14 be remiss if I didn't point out that his oldest son and his
15 wife are here with him today. They have come from Mexico to
16 lend their support to Miguel Angel.
17 What I have asked the Court to do is impose a sentence
18 in gross of 13 years. I have asked the Court to follow the
19 recommendation of the Presentence Report and to deduct the
20 three years he spent in custody in Mexico on the Mexican
21 offense from that total, which would leave a number of 10
22 years. If one applies the two-for-one credit argument that we
23 have made in writing based on the arduous conditions of
24 confinement, that yields a gross sentence equivalent to 20
25 years, which is the maximum under this plea.

19
1 If the Court has no questions of me, I would simply
2 ask leave for Miguel Angel to make some brief remarks to the
3 Court. I would ask the Court to allow me a moment or two to
4 rebut any new matters that government's counsel raises that I
5 might not have adequately addressed here or in writing. And
6 lastly, I would ask that the Court make a recommendation that
7 the Bureau of Prisons designate this man first to a facility in
8 Arizona so that his family has some ability to travel to be
9 able to see him; and secondly, that he be designated to a
10 facility where he could be protected, but not be subjected to
11 the kinds of conditions of confinement that he has to date.
12 Thank you.
13 THE COURT: Mr. Nash, I have a question for you. To
14 what extent, if any, did Mr. Caro-Quintero resist extradition?
15 MR. NASH: He litigated the matter through his lawyers
16 for a number of years after the service of the extradition
17 warrant.
18 THE COURT: When you say he litigated the matter, I
19 would assume that he opposed extradition?
20 MR. NASH: Yes, sir.
21 THE COURT: Mr. Nash, what I would propose is as
22 follows, and that is that we will have Mr. Barrett address the
23 Court at this time regarding sentencing, and then after that
24 you will have an opportunity to rebut anything you believe is
25 appropriate, and then we will hear from Mr. Caro-Quintero.

20
1 Is that acceptable to you?
2 MR. NASH: Yes, sir, it is. Thank you.
3 THE COURT: Mr. Barrett?
4 MR. BARRETT: Could I briefly have a moment to confer
5 with co-counsel?
6 THE COURT: Certainly.
7 MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Your Honor.
8 May I proceed?
9 THE COURT: Yes.
10 MR. BARRETT: Your Honor, I believe there is several
11 issues that need to be emphasized in my remarks. And the first
12 is although Mr. Nash did accurately state that the reason for
13 the disparities in sentencing of certain co-defendants was
14 because of their cooperation, if he did mention that, and at
15 the outset of his remarks he mentioned that one of those
16 co-defendants through a plea agreement, it was entered before
17 Judge Weinshienk, got credit for assigned by the Court for time
18 spent in a Mexican prison, and that is true. In addition, that
19 individual -- his name is Herald Hughes -- got five years on
20 top of that after he was released to the United States by
21 Interpol having served 12 years in prison. So his deal was to
22 a total of 17 years, and he ended up getting good time credit
23 for the time he spent in Mexico and was released some two and a
24 half years later.
25 But the essential difference between his circumstance

21
1 and Mr. Caro-Quintero's circumstance is he cooperated. And how
2 did he cooperate? He gave up what amounted to over a 100-page
3 deposition detailing not only his exploits, but
4 Mr. Caro-Quintero's exploits and other people that they both
5 worked with, giving great detailed indications of his criminal
6 activity, the amount of criminal activity, and so he
7 strengthened the case against his co-defendants, including
9 It should come as no surprise that his 12 years in
10 Mexican prison was not terribly fun. As Mr. Caro-Quintero's
11 counsel indicates, Mexican prisons are what they are and many
12 of them are not country clubs. They are hard time, but a
13 cooperator also went through that particular ordeal before he
14 got to the United States. And Mr. Hughes stood and stands
15 ready to cooperate by giving testimony. I don't think it's
16 going to be necessary for him to give testimony because the
17 Court has indicated that you are, and I appreciate the Court
18 giving us an advanced notice, that you are going to accept this
19 11(c)(1)(C) cap of 20 years.
20 But they are -- other than the fact that they were
21 involved in much the same activity, there is really no
22 comparison between Mr. Hughes' sentence and what
23 Mr. Caro-Quintero hopefully faces here today because of the
24 factor of cooperation. That makes all the difference. Others
25 cooperated as well and were given sentencing breaks.

22
1 But what counsel is asking for now is basically for
2 you to predict what BOP is going to do, and I understand the
3 past is prologue argument, but it's clear by common sense why
4 Mr. Caro-Quintero has been held in isolation in the almost one
5 year since he has been extradited from Mexico.
6 He is a very high profile defendant and I would submit
7 to the Court there are not medical facilities or other
8 facilities that could house him in the interim while he is
9 awaiting trial and since he entered his plea of guilty awaiting
10 sentencing in the State and District of Colorado. But there
11 are once he is designated ample places that he could be sent to
12 that could care for his needs of being protected and also
13 basically, you know, have him in some type of general
14 population.
15 As the Court indicated by your question at the end of
16 Mr. Nash's statement, four of the years that Mr. Caro-Quintero
17 spent in Mexican custody was attributable exclusively to him
18 fighting extradition. That's his right just as a right of a
19 defendant to go to trial. But if a defendant goes to trial, he
20 doesn't thereby have a right for acceptance of responsibility
21 to use a kind of crude analogy.
22 If Mr. Caro-Quintero elected to not fight the charges
23 here in the United States, he could have instructed his lawyers
24 at any time and he would have been extradited to the United
25 States. It took seven years for that to take place, three of

23
1 which are ascribed to Mexican gun charges, which I understand
2 when they arrested him on extradition he had the pistol on him.
3 And he was ultimately found guilty of that offense, and three
4 years of that seven years was for those charges.
5 There is no indication that the Bureau of Prisons will
6 not give him credit for the four years of time spent in Mexico
7 fighting extradition because my understanding is they treat it
8 just like any other pretrial detention. If the Court had a
9 case before you where a defendant was in custody for 18 months
10 before the disposition of his charges, of course the Bureau of
11 Prisons basically gives him credit for that in terms of
12 whatever sentence is ultimately imposed. And we just found out
13 this morning, which Mr. Nash graciously indicated, that any
14 pretrial detention, just like any pretrial detention here in
15 the States, a person is given good time credit for that.
16 And I have to say this kind of in closing. Again, we
17 appreciate the Court giving us an indication that you were
18 going to take the plea deal, and I am not arguing against the
19 plea deal at all, but I would point out to the Court as is set
20 forth in Paragraph 141, which the Court made reference to of
21 the Presentence Report, that the guideline range for
22 Mr. Caro-Quintero's imprisonment based on the quantity of
23 marijuana smuggled, his role in the offense and taking into
24 account the acceptance of responsibility is 324 to 405 months.
25 The statutory maximum of the two counts that he pled to is 300

24
1 months. We have agreed, and I think it's a just and fair
2 disposition, we have agreed that the defendant should be
3 committed to be capped at 20 years, which is 240 months.
4 What's my point? My point is Mr. Caro-Quintero, had
5 he gone to trial and had been convicted of numerous charges
6 facing him, would be looking at actually higher than 324 months
7 because acceptance of responsibility would likely be denied
8 him, a sentence of close to 30 years. We have capped it with
9 your permission at 20 years. That is an enormous break that
10 Mr. Caro-Quintero is enjoined.
11 It's an old case. Again, I am not arguing against the
12 deal. It's an old case and I think it's fair under the
13 circumstances, but he has received this kind of consideration
14 from the government and now the Court that basically saved him
15 10 years of time and all without cooperation, I want to
16 emphasize that, all without cooperation. So the comparisons
17 between certain co-defendants and Mr. Caro-Quintero and what he
18 faces it seems to me just don't apply.
19 So I would ask the Court to sentence Mr. Caro-Quintero
20 in accordance with the plea agreement and give him the maximum
21 sentence which the government seeks of 20 years.
22 THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Barrett.
23 Mr. Nash?
24 MR. NASH: Thank you, sir. Several brief points.
25 Government's counsel tries to portray the time that Mr. Hughes,

25
1 who they have chosen to identify here today in Mexico, as being
2 the same as Mr. Caro-Quintero's. The PSR has a very detailed
3 description and we have tried to amplify on that of the kind of
4 conditions that Miguel Angel faced in Mexico. At Footnote
5 No. 3 at Page 25 of the presentence investigation, Ms. Ricca
6 quotes Special Agent Sperry on some of the remarks that
7 Mr. Hughes made about how he was incarcerated in Mexico.
8 He describes it as a country club. He says he was
9 able to have his own cook. He could take tennis lessons while
10 he was incarcerated in Mexico. Other inmates could carry guns
11 if they wanted and other fringe benefits could be purchased if
12 you have the wherewithal. I think to equate that kind of time
13 with what Miguel Angel has been exposed to is not supportive of
14 the facts.
15 Secondly, fighting extradition is something we
16 concede, but I don't know what difference it makes in the
17 sentence. Time is time. Whether Miguel Angel was housed in
18 jail in Mexico or housed in jail in the United States, he would
19 still be spending time in custody. It is not as if he waived
20 extradition that he would have been released or in a
21 non-jail-type setting in the United States.
22 Lastly, Mr. Barrett does a good job and it's a
23 well-recognized sentencing argument to talk up what the maximum
24 that could have happened had Mr. Caro-Quintero been convicted
25 under the guidelines. But we all know that the guidelines are
26
1 but one factor, a factor the sentencing courts give a nod to
2 and calculations on. But the mandate of the Supreme Court
3 since Booker has always been individualized sentencing apart
4 from the guidelines and in consideration of 3553 of the
5 specific circumstances and a wide range of factors.
6 And before I sit down, I frankly would be remiss if I
7 didn't make one other statement for the record. This has been
8 a complicated case. It's been very difficult for a variety of
9 factors, as the Court can imagine, and it's had some emotional
10 potentially explosive issues in it which the Court is aware of
11 as well. Our job in bringing closure to this case has been
12 made much, much easier by an extremely high degree of candor
13 and professionalism on the part of the agents that we have
14 worked with and the prosecutors we have worked with. They have
15 been very forthcoming in their disclosure. They have been very
16 candid in responding to the questions that were posed by us.
17 And their cooperation and courtesy and professionalism with us
18 really helped us get this case resolved in the fashion that we
19 have, and I think the record should reflect that. Everything
20 else, Your Honor, I think we covered either in writing on in my
21 prior remarks.
22 THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Nash.
23 Does Mr. Caro-Quintero wish to address the Court?
24 MR. NASH: Yes, Your Honor, he does.
25 THE COURT: So if you could please go to the podium.

27
1 Mr. Caro-Quintero, is your headphone working well? Can you
2 understand through the interpreter what I am saying?
3 THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.
4 THE COURT: All right. Is there anything that you
5 would like to tell me regarding what the appropriate sentence
6 in this case should be?
7 THE DEFENDANT: Well, Your Honor, the truth is that I
8 am aware of the fact that I made a mistake as a human being and
9 I am very regretful. Therefore, I ask for the forgiveness of
10 all of those who are present here and in particular of my
11 family.
12 I promise that I will not make a mistake like that
13 again. And what I would like to ask you is to allow me to be
14 with my family, to be with my children, to help them get along
15 in life, and that is why I am asking you for a sentence of 10
16 years. It has been a very hard time being separated from them.
17 And additionally my mom who is ill, I would like to be allowed
18 to be beside her if you and if God will permit. That's all I
19 have to say.
20 THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Caro-Quintero. Anything
21 else?
22 THE DEFENDANT: That's all. Thank you, Your Honor.
23 MR. NASH: Thank you, Your Honor.
24 THE COURT: And you may be seated.
25 Pursuant to the United States Supreme Court rulings in

28
1 the Booker and FanFan cases, the United States Sentencing
2 Commission guidelines have become advisory. The Court, while
3 not bound to apply the guidelines, has taken them into account
4 and also has taken into account the sentencing factors which
5 are identified at 18 U.S.C. 3553(a).
6 Neither the government nor the defendant has filed any
7 objections to the Presentence Investigation Report and
8 therefore the factual statements and guideline applications in
9 the report are adopted without objection as the Court's finding
10 of fact concerning sentencing, although I will note that
11 Mr. Caro-Quintero did make an objection to a portion of the
12 Presentence Investigation Report that contained -- that being
13 Paragraph 78 which contained a description of
14 Mr. Caro-Quintero's operation provided by co-defendant. I have
15 not taken the facts stated in that paragraph into account in
16 imposing sentence.
17 The Court finds that the total offense level is 78 and
18 the defendant's criminal history category is one which results
19 in an imprisonment range of 324 to 405 months. However, given
20 the statutory maximum sentence of 20 years on Case No.
21 90-CR-130 and five years in Case No. 09-CR-367, the guideline
22 sentence becomes 300 months, in other words, 25 years pursuant
23 to Section 5G1.2(b) of the guidelines and Application Note 1
24 therein. The fine range is $25,000 to $250,000 and the
25 supervised release range is two to three years.

29
1 The Court accepts the parties' 11(c)(1)(C) plea
2 agreement for a variant sentence and will also grant in part
3 the defendant's motion for a variant sentence for the following
4 reasons: One of the factors which the Court considered in
5 terms of accepting the plea agreement in this case is the fact
6 that this case charges acts which occurred a long time ago.
7 The length of time that has passed since the acts occurred have
8 undoubtedly created various types of proof problems.
9 I also accept the fact that Mr. Caro-Quintero may have
10 wished to wrap up the cases that were pending against him in
11 both Arizona and also in the District of Colorado. And also,
12 of course, it can't be overlooked, although it's not
13 specifically a grounds to accept an 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement
14 that Mr. Caro-Quintero has achieved a considerable benefit by
15 entering a plea that he has because it has capped his total
16 exposure considerably. Nonetheless, the Court does find that
17 there is a good basis to accept an 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement
18 in this case which contains a requirement that the Court
19 sentence him between 10 to 20 years.
20 In terms of the factors that Mr. Caro-Quintero has
21 identified in his sentencing statement which includes the
22 request for a variant sentence, the Court will make the
23 following comments on them: One grounds that Mr. Caro-Quintero
24 seeks a variant sentence -- and by variant in this context, it
25 means something other than the 20 years that the United States
30
1 has requested -- is because of his conditions of confinement.
2 Those conditions of confinement are of three different types.
3 First is his confinement in jails in Mexico. Second
4 are his conditions of confinement since he has been extradited
5 to the United States up until the present. And third are the
6 conditions that Mr. Caro-Quintero believes that he will be
7 under after he is sentenced today.
8 First of all, we will talk about the conditions that
9 Mr. Caro-Quintero experienced while he was in Mexico. Of
10 course, we don't have any direct evidence of what exactly those
11 are, but no one has opposed the description of those conditions
12 which are contained in the Presentence Investigation Report.
13 And the Court, as I indicated before, will accept those
14 representations as being the facts in this case.
15 That would indicate that the conditions under which
16 Mr. Caro-Quintero was incarcerated in Mexico were indeed
17 extremely difficult, were poor conditions, were very much
18 unlike the conditions that Mr. Hughes experienced, at least at
19 the beginning of Mr. Hughes' sentence in Mexico, which would be
20 somewhat of the stereotype prison conditions that one sometimes
21 hears about concerning drug dealers in Mexico.
22 Mr. Caro-Quintero had to undergo solitary confinement
23 and experience other conditions which are much worse than
24 anything that he would experience within the United States.
25 Mr. Nash in his comments to the Court stated that jail is jail.
31
1 However, in this case the Court believes that it would be
2 inappropriate to grant a variant sentence based upon the
3 conditions that Mr. Caro-Quintero experienced in Mexico. The
4 reason is as follows:
5 First and foremost, Mr. Caro-Quintero resisted
6 extradition. As Mr. Barrett said it's his right to do so, but
7 nonetheless, one of the consequences is that he remain
8 incarcerated in Mexico and under those particular jail
9 conditions. The second factor is that conditions in Mexico are
10 what they are. Mr. Caro-Quintero operated his organization
11 from Mexico. And the fact that he was arrested there and then
12 held there prior to his extradition to the United States are
13 not surprising and don't in and of themselves, while harsh,
14 constitute grounds for the Court to grant a variant sentence.
15 Mr. Caro-Quintero also mentions his current conditions
16 which have included solitary confinement, have included a
17 baffling lack of clothing being supplied to him and which have
18 also included a somewhat hard to understand restriction on
19 contact with his family. However, it is more than mere common
20 sense that Mr. Caro-Quintero's conditions of confinement in the
21 United States up until the present have been what they are.
22 As pointed out by the United States in its response to
23 the motion for variant sentence, Mr. Caro-Quintero has been in
24 the United States on an extradition warrant. He is, as
25 everyone concedes, a high profile defendant. And under the

32
1 circumstances the Bureau of Prisons had the responsibility,
2 even a responsibility that may have exceeded
3 Mr. Caro-Quintero's own wishes, to protect him and to make sure
4 that he remained safe while he was in the United States prior
5 to any type of conviction and sentencing.
6 For that reason it is not surprising that the Bureau
7 of Prisons decided to place Mr. Caro-Quintero in a special
8 housing unit, whether it be at FDC or at USP Florence, in order
9 to take steps that would as best as the BOP could make sure
10 that he was protected. Those conditions undoubtedly weren't
11 pleasant as solitary confinement rarely is, but it is at least
12 understandable why the BOP kept him in solitary confinement and
13 a special housing unit. As I said before, I don't understand
14 some of the other conditions he has been under, but those in
15 and of themselves don't justify grounds for a variant sentence.
16 In terms of his future incarceration, Mr. Barrett on
17 behalf of the United States correctly points out that courts
18 should generally not engage in speculation about what those
19 would be. That is a matter that is entrusted to the Bureau of
20 Prisons by law. However, I will make the following comments
21 and that is I don't share in the dim prognosis for
22 Mr. Caro-Quintero's future confinement that Mr. Nash does.
23 The Presentence Investigation Report in this case will
24 contain the statements of both Mr. Till on behalf of United
25 States and also various agents from the DEA explaining why
33
1 Mr. Caro-Quintero does not pose a threat by himself to the
2 safety of other people, and in the Court's experience the
3 Bureau of Prisons will take that into consideration in
4 determining what the appropriate level of confinement of him
5 will be.
6 I also share the government's view that it would be
7 highly unusual if Mr. Caro-Quintero would be designated to ADX,
8 and if he were, he would be subject to the step-down program.
9 It's probably likely that he would be designated to a special
10 housing unit, probably in a USP, but I don't believe that he is
11 likely to remain in the special housing unit once the Bureau of
12 Prisons has the opportunity to ascertain what threats may exist
13 to Mr. Caro-Quintero regardless of whether or not he may
14 believe that he should be released to the general population.
15 So the bottom line is I don't believe he is going to
16 be serving out his sentence in solitary confinement, so I don't
17 believe that the past is prologue to the act. Rather, I think
18 that his conditions will be somewhat different. In any event,
19 the Court will deny conditions of confinement as a basis for
20 the Court granting a variant sentence in terms of reducing it
21 below the 20-year maximum that the United States has asked for.
22 Mr. Caro-Quintero raises a number of other factors in
23 his request for a variant sentence. One of them I have just
24 touched on which is the lack of violence in background and
25 activity. Another is his institutional adjustment and also the

34
1 savings to the Court and the government. The Court certainly
2 credits what Mr. Caro-Quintero has stated in his sentencing
3 statement. His adjustment has made him really a model inmate
4 in terms of his behavior while in the United States.
5 Undoubtedly, his plea has freed up the resources of a large
6 number of agents.
7 However, the Court does not believe that those factors
8 for the reasons that are stated in the Presentence
9 Investigation Report are appropriate factors to use in reducing
10 his sentence. Savings to the government is almost always a
11 consequence of a plea of guilty, and Mr. Caro-Quintero has a
12 lot of other reasons, including administrative consequences, to
13 good behavior while he is being held in custody.
14 Similarly, Mr. Caro-Quintero mentions remorse. And
15 the Court having read both Mr. Caro-Quintero's letter to the
16 Court and also the other material contained in the presentence
17 investigation and in the sentencing statement does certainly
18 believe that Mr. Caro-Quintero is very remorseful for what he
19 has done.
20 However, that factor does not constitute an unusual or
21 extraordinary factor that would cause the Court to vary the
22 sentence additionally for the following reason, and that is
23 anyone who has committed a crime, and the Court sees lots of
24 them, and who is now alone in jail, a condition that
25 Mr. Caro-Quintero is especially familiar with, has time to

35
1 reflect on his condition and consider the fact that all of the
2 crimes and all of the money that were consequences of those
3 crimes really didn't mean anything at all and that what really
4 is important is one's family and those persons who both care
5 for him and who he cares for. And so his remorse falls within
6 that understandable category and doesn't in and of itself
7 constitute a grounds for additional variance in his sentence.
8 That brings us then to the factor of Mr. Hughes. As
9 Mr. Barrett indicated, another -- a judge who was formerly
10 assigned to these particular cases sentenced Mr. Hughes in such
11 a way that he received credit for 12 years that he had served
12 in Mexico, was given an additional five-year sentence. And as
13 a result of that, there is an argument that Mr. Caro-Quintero
14 should, in order to achieve one of the factors that is set
15 forth in 3553(a), be credited with the time Mr. Caro-Quintero
16 served in regard to an unrelated weapons conviction in Mexico
17 for which he served three years.
18 Mr. Barrett is absolutely correct that one of the
19 principal distinctions between Mr. Caro-Quintero and Mr. Hughes
20 is Mr. Hughes' cooperation. Other than the cooperation, the
21 Court does find, however, that Mr. Hughes and Mr. Caro-Quintero
22 are similarly situated. They are similarly situated not
23 because Mr. Hughes was the leader of this particular drug
24 organization. Mr. Caro-Quintero was. But Mr. Hughes was
25 extensively involved. He had extensive experience and was a

36
1 person who moved or had his hands on virtually all of the
2 marijuana that was distributed in connection with the crimes
3 that Mr. Caro-Quintero was involved with. So in that regard
4 the Court finds he was similarly situated.
5 The question then becomes whether in order to
6 effectuate the purpose of not sentencing similarly situated
7 persons in a disparate way the Court should decline
8 Mr. Caro-Quintero's request that he receive credit for the
9 three years he spent in a Mexican jail solely because of that
10 cooperation or whether there are other factors that are
11 appropriately considered by the Court in giving him credit for
12 that time.
13 As the United States points out, typically whether or
14 not someone receives credit for sentences is the province of
15 the Bureau of Prisons. However, that was not the situation
16 with Mr. Hughes. Rather, as an explicit condition of his
17 sentencing he did receive credit for the 12 years, and that
18 12-year sentence was obviously a lot longer than
19 Mr. Caro-Quintero's three years. So that does create a
20 significant anomaly in the sentencing of someone who was
21 similarly situated.
22 And for that reason the Court agrees with the
23 presentence investigation recommendation and will grant the
24 motion for a variant sentence to the extent that the Court will
25 give Mr. Caro-Quintero credit, reduce his sentence that the

37
1 Court would otherwise sentence him to by three years based upon
2 that three-year sentence that he served in the Republic of
3 Mexico, not because of the conditions under which he served
4 that sentence, but because the Court believes that it would
5 honor the particular and unusual credit that Mr. Hughes, a
6 similarly situated individual, received when he was sentenced.
7 Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is
8 the judgment of the Court that the Defendant Miguel Angel
9 Caro-Quintero is hereby committed to the custody of the Bureau
10 of Prisons to be imprisoned for a term of 204 months on Count 1
11 in Case No. 90-CR-130 and 60 months on Count 1 of Case No.
12 09-CR-367 to run concurrently for a total combined sentence of
13 204 months, in other words, 17 years.
14 The United States pursuant to the terms of the plea
15 agreement has filed a number of motions to dismiss counts and
16 indictments in other cases. And the Court will at this time
17 grant those motions to dismiss which are as follows: In Case
18 No. 90-CR-130, the Court will dismiss Counts 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and
19 9 of the second superseding indictment as to Mr. Caro-Quintero
20 only.
21 As to Case No. 09-CR-367, the Court will dismiss the
22 second superseding indictment and Count 2 of the superseding
23 indictment as to Mr. Caro-Quintero only.
24 In Case No. 09-CR-371, given the fact that
25 Mr. Caro-Quintero has been sentenced in the two cases before

38
1 the Court today, the Court will dismiss the indictment in Case
2 No. 09-CR-371.
3 In regard to Case No. 09-CR-372, based upon the fact
4 that Mr. Caro-Quintero has been sentenced on the two cases
5 before the Court, the Court will dismiss the indictment in Case
6 No. 09-CR-372.
7 Also it's the Court's understanding that certain
8 indictments will be dismissed in the state of Arizona. Is that
9 correct, Mr. Barrett?
10 MR. BARRETT: Yes, Your Honor.
11 THE COURT: Thank you.
12 Upon release from imprisonment, the Mr. Caro-Quintero
13 will be placed on supervised release for a term of two years in
14 Case No. 90-CR-130 and two years in Case No. 09-CR-367 to run
15 concurrently. Within 72 hours of release from the custody of
16 the Bureau of Prisons, Mr. Caro-Quintero shall report in person
17 to the probation office in the district to which he is
18 released.
19 While on supervised release, Mr. Caro-Quintero shall
20 not commit another federal, state or local crime; shall not
21 possess a firearm as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921; and shall comply
22 with the standard conditions that have been adopted by this
23 Court.
24 The Court waives the mandatory drug testing provisions
25 of 18 U.S.C. 3583(d) because it is likely that

39
1 Mr. Caro-Quintero will be deported. That, by the way, is also
2 the reason that the Court will impose only a two-year term of
3 supervised release as opposed to a maximum three given the
4 likelihood of Mr. Caro's deportation and the unlikelihood that
5 Mr. Caro-Quintero would ever come back to the United States.
6 Of course, Mr. Caro-Quintero is here only because of the fact
7 that he was extradited to the United States.
8 Mr. Caro-Quintero shall cooperate in the collection of
9 DNA as directed by the probation officer and shall comply with
10 the following special condition: That if Mr. Caro-Quintero is
11 deported following this sentence, he shall not thereafter
12 re-enter the United States illegally. Should Mr. Caro-Quintero
13 re-enter the United States legally, he shall report to the
14 nearest U.S. probation office within 72 hours of his return.
15 Also Mr. Caro-Quintero shall pay a mandatory special
16 assessment fee of $200.
17 The Court finds that the defendant does not have the
18 ability to pay a fine, so the Court will waive a fine in this
19 case. The presentence investigation does not provide any
20 factual basis to believe that Mr. Caro-Quintero has access to
21 any assets that he may have accumulated during the time that he
22 was running this particular conspiracy.
23 The defendant is advised of his right to appeal his
24 sentence in this case. If Mr. Caro-Quintero desires to appeal,
25 a notice of appeal must be filed with the clerk of the court

40
1 within 10 days after entry of judgment or the right to appeal
2 will be lost. If Mr. Caro-Quintero is unable to afford an
3 attorney for an appeal, the Court will appoint one to represent
4 him. If the defendant so requests, the clerk of the court must
5 immediately prepare and file a notice of appeal on behalf of
6 the defendant.
7 And finally, as to Mr. Nash's request that the Court
8 include as part of its sentencing recommendations a
9 recommendation that he be designated to a Bureau of Prisons
10 facility within the state of Arizona, the Court won't do that
11 specifically given the fact that there may be security aspects
12 that would cause the Bureau of Prisons not to want to place
13 Mr. Caro-Quintero within the state of Arizona.
14 However, the Court will include as part of its
15 recommendation that to the extent there is a facility that has
16 the appropriate security designation, that he be placed at a
17 place closer to his family. The Court does that not so much
18 for Mr. Caro-Quintero who got himself into this predicament as
19 he admits on his own, but rather based upon the fact that that
20 would allow his family better ability to visit him.
21 The Court has reviewed as part of the materials
22 submitted on behalf of Mr. Caro-Quintero the different letters
23 from his family, including the letter from his mother. And the
24 Court believes that the goals that are included within
25 sentencing would be facilitated by Mr. Caro-Quintero's family

41
1 being able to more easily visit him while he is incarcerated
2 for the crimes that he has been sentenced for today.
3 Mr. Barrett, anything else on behalf of the United
4 States?
5 MR. BARRETT: Your Honor, I may have misspoken when
6 you asked me about the dismissal of other Arizona charges. My
7 understanding is that everything was transferred up here via
8 Rule 20, so they would be covered by the orders and motions
9 before you.
10 THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Barrett.
11 Mr. Nash, do you agree?
12 MR. NASH: I agree, sir, and I have nothing else.
13 THE COURT: Thank you very much.
14 At this time Mr. Caro-Quintero will be remanded to the
15 custody of the United States Marshals.
16 Thanks in particular to the probation department for
17 the excellent Presentence Investigation Report that was
18 completed in this case, to our Deputy United States Marshals
19 who are present today and also to Ms. Cahill and Ms. Bahr who
20 have been our interpreters.
21 The Court will be in recess.
22 (Recess at 11:19 a.m.)
23
24
25
42
1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
2 I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from
3 the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter. Dated
4 at Denver, Colorado, this 25th day of February, 2010.
6 S/Janet M. Coppock
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Miguel Caro Quintero Sentencing Hearing Transcript

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Miguel Caro Quintero Sentencing Hearing Transcript

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Case 1:90-cr-00130-PAB Document 337 Filed 02/25/10 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 42

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

7 MIGUEL ANGEL CARO-QUINTERO,

12 Proceedings before the HONORABLE PHILIP A. BRIMMER,

13 Judge, United States District Court for the District of

14 Colorado, commencing at 10:05 a.m., on the 4th day of

15 February, 2010, in Courtroom A701, United States Courthouse,

24 Proceeding Recorded by Mechanical Stenography, Transcription

2 Mark J. Barrett, Susan Knox, Guy Till and Stephanie

3 Podolak, Assistant United States Attorneys, 1225 17th Street,

4 Suite 700, Denver, CO 80202, appearing for the plaintiff.

5 Walter B. Nash, III of Nash & Kirchner, P.C.,

6 P.O. Box 2310, Tucson, AZ 85702;

7 Stephen G. Ralls, Law Offices of Stephen G. Ralls,

8 273 South Scott Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85701; and

9 John M. Richilano of Richilano Shea, LLC,

10 1800 15th Street, #101, Denver, CO 80202, appearing for the

13 THE COURT: The matters before the Court are United

14 States of America v. Miguel Angel Caro-Quintero, Case 90-CR-130

15 and also Case No. 09-CR-367, which is a Rule 20 transfer case

16 from the District of Arizona. The District of Arizona number

18 I will take entries of appearance, please.

19 MR. BARRETT: Good morning, Your Honor. Assistant

20 United States Attorney Mark Barrett on behalf of the

21 government. With me is Assistant United States Attorney Susan

22 Knox. Also in the courtroom in front of the bar is Assistant

23 United States Attorney Guy Till and Assistant United States

24 Attorney Stephanie Podolak.

25 If you would like, I would introduce the people at the

1 counsel table as well.

2 THE COURT: Yes, please.

3 MR. BARRETT: Good morning, Your Honor. To my left is

4 Secret Service Agent Mike Reddy. Next to him is retired DEA

5 Special Agent Steve Sperry. The gentleman to my right next to

7 Agent Bruce Fralick. At the table behind us is DEA intel

10 THE COURT: Thank you. And good morning to each of

12 On behalf of Mr. Caro-Quintero?

13 MR. NASH: Good morning, Your Honor. Walter Nash. I

14 am appearing this morning on behalf of Miguel Angel

15 Caro-Quintero along with John Richilano and Steven Ralls. He

16 is present, in custody, and he is being assisted by the

18 THE COURT: Thank you. Good morning to each of you.

19 (Interpreters were sworn.)

20 INTERPRETER CAHILL: I do.

21 INTERPRETER BAHR: I do.

22 THE COURT: Thank you very much. We are here for a

23 sentencing pursuant to Mr. Caro-Quintero's pleas of guilty in

25 behalf of Mr. Caro-Quintero a sentencing memorandum, guideline

1 objection and request for a variant sentence. However, as

2 things have turned out, there is no disagreement as to the

4 Mr. Barrett, has the United States received a copy of

5 the Presentence Investigation Report and also the addendum, as

6 well as the sentencing memorandum and the supplement to that

7 filed by Mr. Caro-Quintero?

8 MR. BARRETT: We have, Your Honor.

9 THE COURT: And the United States responded to the

10 request for a variant sentence.

11 Any other briefs or motions or objections on behalf of

12 the United States?

13 MR. BARRETT: No, Your Honor.

14 THE COURT: Thank you.

15 Mr. Nash, on behalf of Mr. Caro-Quintero, any

16 additional filings in the way of objections or corrections to

17 the presentence investigation?

18 MR. NASH: Not as to those elements, Your Honor.