ÿWPC{3 ¶èU߯GøÚR,}`Ç£B³ DSÉMå)ÂE±Œ\˜8U„©ÿë*JÃâÜdá$&“"ùù èA^ô/k0ðGl†‚Ü+­}ù ºX3TAÑüÇ~Q‚Cð鞯ѕ˚ô Á« ba“ªÕðèíÑÀ ßêYyÒAС`Á}ÇLè}aåàrä­Ái›ßP%$©…\c¯½èX¿Êvlx|ò½ðZê²wKÜE¯ÉÌwÕÓá=©Dzz÷”|ë,Ûó_¶*D.ôŽH+—jóºl|”ì«4îÜ+¥¥Lè*»öqmð2< æ—`™¶ñ›_Ãû,l4¡êècê6ZI©&ÔT×ÞÂ…#ÉF U> %M 0GS ­š š š ^ G wS 4W k z 0c| bß 0Dç ç b+E3 m5NLU8NU@†ŠÆ¤PUôI"OOO‹q8ü×4"4"² $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(½(õÅ(Å(Å(Å(Å(Å(Å(÷º, ±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/±/ BÑ2Ñ2Ñ2Ñ2Ñ2Ñ2Ñ2Ñ2Ñ2Ñ2Ñ2 0î2˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 5eÈÇ,,,,ÈÇ0<èÀ( 9Z+&Courier RegularX(îí$¡¡Ô€XmTXXXÔ £Ý ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú*Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔOf€the€Federal€Circuit,€sitting€by€designation.ÏM5ó µ‰55‚ ‚ÐHŠ3|x(;3™ç$©©Ý ƒîí!ÝÔ€X>BXXXÔÝ  Ý- ù-(Ã$òòÚ  Ú*Ú  Úóó- ù-ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ<4šÛ 9Z+‹ Courier New (@øÐ Z‹(Times New Roman  €Ô_ÔÝ ƒ„VÃÿÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú1Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝCounsel€for€Ramos€stated€"[The]€percentage€of€people€who€live€inÐ ° Ðpublic€housing,€this€is€maybe€thirty€or€forty€percent€of€theÐ †Ö Ðgeneral€population,€and€[Ramos]€is€being€excluded€and€prejudicedÐ \¬ Ðbecause€of€this." šÝ ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú2Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔThe€number€and€scope€of€transactions€is€in€dispute.€€After€beingÐ ° Ðasked€whether€he€had€observed€Gonzlez€engage€in€more€than€ten€drugÐ †Ö Ðsales€to€Rivera,€Obregð;ðn€said€"Yes."€€However,€on€cross„Ð \¬ Ðexamination,€Obregð;ðn€said€that€he€had€seen€"a€couple."€€InÐ 2‚ Ðaddition,€Obregð;ðn€could€not€explain€the€difference€in€quantityÐ X Ðbetween€"an€eighth"€and€"a€half"€kilogram€of€cocaine,€but€statedÐ Þ. Ðthat€he€knew€they€were€different€quantities. KÔ_ÔÝ ƒ„VÃÿÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú4Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝThe€special€interrogatory€read,€in€part:Ð ° ÐÌ"3.à  àA.à ` àIf€you€find€either€of€the€defendants€guilty€as€to€CountÐ \¬ ÐOne,€do€you€find€that€the€amount€of€cocaine€involved€in€theÐ 2‚ Ðconspiracy€was€five€(5)€kilograms€or€more:Ð X ÐÌà  àà ` à____à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____Ð ´  Ðà  àà ` àYESà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€NOÐ Š Ú ÐÌà  àIf€you€answered€YES€to€question€3(A),€sign€and€date€theÐ 6 †  Ðverdict€form.€€If€you€answered€NO€to€question€3(A),€then€proceed€toÐ  \  Ðquestion€3(B)." üÝ ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú8Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔSome€courts€have€suggested€that,€post„òòApprendióó,€distinctionsÐ ° Ðbetween€sentencing€factors€and€substantive€elements€of€ðð€841€areÐ †Ö Ðsomewhat€untenable.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòWestmorelandóó,€240Ð \¬ ÐF.3d€618,€632€(7th€Cir.€2001)€("In€light€of€òòApprendióó,€we€could€noÐ 2‚ Ðlonger€look€to€the€clear€demarcation€between€the€elements€of€theÐ X Ðcrime€defined€by€ðð€841€and€the€penalty€provisions€of€that€sectionÐ Þ. Ðas€a€means€of€avoiding€the€constitutional€issues€raised€by€theÐ ´  Ðplacement€of€drug€quantity€determination€in€the€hands€of€theÐ Š Ú Ðsentencing€judge.").€€However,€as€we€emphasize€throughout€thisÐ ` ° Ðopinion,€regardless€of€whether€drug€quantity€is€a€sentencing€factorÐ 6 †  Ðor€a€substantive€element,€the€drug€quantity€that€determines€theÐ  \  Ðmaximum€sentence€for€a€drug€conspiracy€charge€under€ðð€846€is€theÐ â 2  Ðòòconspiracy„wideóó€quantity,€which€the€jury€did€determine€in€theÐ ¸  Ðpresent€case. Ý ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú9Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔThis€is€also€clear€from€the€language€of€the€statute,€which,Ð ° Ðwithout€any€reference€to€an€individual's€role€in€a€conspiracy,€saysÐ †Ö Ðthat€"[a]ny€person€who€attempts€or€conspires€to€commit€[aÐ \¬ Ðcontrolled€substance€offense]€shall€be€subject€to€the€sameÐ 2‚ Ðpenalties€as€those€prescribed€for€the€offense."€€21€U.S.C.€ðð€846Ð X Ð(2006). Ý ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú5Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔFed.€R.€Crim.€P.€29(c)(1)€provides:€€"A€defendant€may€move€forÐ ° Ða€judgment€of€acquittal,€or€renew€such€a€motion,€within€7€daysÐ †Ö Ðafter€a€guilty€verdict€or€after€the€court€discharges€the€jury,Ð \¬ Ðwhichever€is€later." .Ý ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú3Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔFed.€R.€Crim.€P.€29(a)€provides:€"After€the€government€closesÐ ° Ðits€evidence€or€after€the€close€of€all€the€evidence,€the€court€onÐ †Ö Ðthe€defendant's€motion€must€enter€a€judgment€of€acquittal€of€anyÐ \¬ Ðoffense€for€which€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€sustain€aÐ 2‚ Ðconviction.€The€court€may€on€its€own€consider€whether€the€evidenceÐ X Ðis€insufficient€to€sustain€a€conviction.€If€the€court€denies€aÐ Þ. Ðmotion€for€a€judgment€of€acquittal€at€the€close€of€the€government'sÐ ´  Ðevidence,€the€defendant€may€offer€evidence€without€having€reservedÐ Š Ú Ðthe€right€to€do€so." ÍÝ ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú6Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔFed.€R.€Crim.€P.€33(a)€provides:€€"Upon€the€defendant's€motion,Ð ° Ðthe€court€may€vacate€any€judgment€and€grant€a€new€trial€if€theÐ †Ö Ðinterest€of€justice€so€requires.€€If€the€case€was€tried€without€aÐ \¬ Ðjury,€the€court€may€take€additional€testimony€and€enter€a€newÐ 2‚ Ðjudgment." ¨Ý ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú12Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔBecause€he€was€sentenced€as€a€career€offender,€Ramos€does€notÐ ° Ðmake€the€argument,€as€Gonzlez€did,€that€his€sentence€was€flawedÐ †Ö Ðunder€òòColð;ðn„Solsóó,€354€F.3d€101.€€Under€Sentencing€GuidelinesÐ \¬ Ððð4B1.1,€a€career€offender,€such€as€Ramos,€convicted€of€an€offenseÐ 2‚ Ðfor€which€the€maximum€penalty€is€life€imprisonment,€such€asÐ X Ðconspiracy€to€distribute€five€or€more€kilograms€of€cocaine,€isÐ Þ. Ðassigned€an€offense€level€of€37.€€Based€on€an€offense€level€of€37€Ð ´  Ðand€a€criminal€history€category€of€VI,€the€sentencing€guidelinesÐ Š Ú Ðrecommend€a€sentence€range€of€360€months€to€life€imprisonment.€Ð ` ° ÐU.S.S.G.€ðð€5A.€€Thus,€unlike€Gonzlez,€for€whom€sentencing€requiredÐ 6 †  Ðan€individualized€determination€of€drug€quantity€under€U.S.S.G.Ð  \  Ððððð1B1.3€and€2D1.1(c),€the€determination€of€Ramos'€sentence€wasÐ â 2  Ðbased€solely€on€his€prior€criminal€history.  ëÝ ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú7Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Government€suggests€that€by€failing€to€raise€theirÐ ° Ðobjections€at€the€time€the€jury€was€charged,€Gonzlez€and€RamosÐ †Ö Ðhave€waived,€rather€than€forfeited€their€objections€and€that€we€mayÐ \¬ Ðnot€review€their€claims.€€However,€as€we€noted€in€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð 2‚ ÐòòNelson„Rodrguezóó,€for€an€objection€based€on€òòApprendióó,€"[W]e€thinkÐ X Ðit€sufficient€if€the€defendant€raises€the€issue€at€sentencing."€Ð Þ. Ð319€F.3d€12,€47€(1st€Cir.€2003).€€Although€there€is€someÐ ´  Ðdiscrepancy€between€the€parties€as€to€whether€the€objection€wasÐ Š Ú Ðraised€by€either€or€both€parties€during€sentencing,€"we€prefer€toÐ ` ° Ðassume€rather€than€decide€that€the€issue€was€preserved€in€theseÐ 6 †  Ðcircumstances."€€òòId.óó€at€48. íÝ ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú10Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔWe€do€not€see€any€merit€to€Ramos'€claim€that€the€instructionsÐ ° Ðwere€flawed€because€they€make€reference€only€to€cocaine.€Ð †Ö ÐParticipation€in€a€conspiracy€to€distribute€cocaine€alone€would€beÐ \¬ Ðsufficient€to€sustain€a€conviction€under€21€U.S.C.€ðð€846,€and€muchÐ 2‚ Ðevidence€regarding€to€Ramos'€involvement€in€the€processing€andÐ X Ðselling€of€cocaine€was€presented€at€trial.€€The€fact€that€Ramos€wasÐ Þ.  Ðòòalsoóó€involved€in€trafficking€of€heroin€and€marijuana€would€notÐ ° Ðchange€the€outcome€of€the€case. Ý ƒ„VÃ$ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú11Ú  Úóó€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔGonzlez€suggests€that€jurors€were€"puzzled"€at€the€specialÐ ° Ðinterrogatories€asking€them€to€determine€"artificial€floors"Ð †Ö Ðcorresponding€to€the€amount€of€drugs€involved€in€the€conspiracy.€Ð \¬ ÐThese€floors€determine€the€maximum€sentences€prescribed€in€21Ð 2‚ ÐU.S.C.€ðð€841(b).€€Given€the€extensive€testimony€in€the€caseÐ X Ðregarding€the€quantity€of€drugs€flowing€through€the€Malvinas€drugÐ Þ. Ðpoint,€we€think€the€jury€was€up€to€the€task€of€determining€whetherÐ ´  Ðthe€conspiracy€involved€more€or€less€than€five€kilograms€ofÐ Š Ú Ðcocaine. d(J2VÃ$¤¤Ý ƒîí!ÝÔ€X>BXXXÔÝ  ÝÓ  ÓòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó€€Ý ƒîí!ÝÔ€X!–XXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€°§4°XX!–ÔÑ€ÑÑ8€!–XXdÖdÈ8ÑÑ  ÑÙ*ƒ!Ùò òÔ‡°j«°°°§4Ôà@‹ ‹ ìàUnited€States€Court€of€AppealsˆÐ ° ÐÔ€„Å¢„°°j«Ôà@ÈÈ ìàFor€the€First€CircuitˆÐ „Ô ÐÔ#†„Æ„„„Å¢Þ#Ôó óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àÔ€X!–X„„ÆÔßA€y) °°` dE<ã` AßÐ ä4 ÐÌÌNo.€05„1184Ð Ÿ ï ÐÌà@ìàUNITED€STATES€OF€AMERICA,ˆÐ K › Ðà@ÐÐ&ìàAppellee,ˆÐ ! q ÐÌà@tt)ìàv.ˆÐ Í   ÐÌà@ìàRAFAEL€A.€GONZððLEZ„VLEZ,ˆÐ yÉ  Ðà@ ìàDefendant,€Appellant.ˆÐ OŸ  ÐÌßA€y) °°` d³E<ú` AßÐ ûK  ÐÌÌNo.€05„1758Ð ¶ ÐÌà@ìàUNITED€STATES€OF€AMERICA,ˆÐ b² Ðà@ÐÐ&ìàAppellee,ˆÐ 8ˆ ÐÌà@tt)ìàv.ˆÐ ä4 ÐÌà@ ìàJOS€A.€RAMOS„ROMERO,ˆÐ à Ðà@ ìàDefendant,€Appellant.ˆÐ f¶ ÐÌÌßA€y) °°` d³E<ç` AßÐ è8 ÐÌà@` ` ìàAPPEALS€FROM€THE€UNITED€STATES€DISTRICT€COURTˆÐ Í Ðà@¨ ¨ ìàFOR€THE€DISTRICT€OF€PUERTO€Ô_ÔRICOÔ_ԈР£ó  Ðà@¬¬ìà[Hon.€Salvador€E.€Casellas,€òòU.S.€District€Judgeóó]ˆÐ yÉ! ÐÌßA€y) °°` d³E<$!` AßÐ %!u# ÐÌà@„„'ìàBeforeˆÐ  "Z% Ðà@° ° ìàà@@° ° ìàTorruella,€Selya,€and€Dyk,׃×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú*Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׈Ð à"0& Ðà@hh#ìàòòCircuit€Judgesóó.ˆÐ ¶#' ÐÌßA€y) °°` dE<a%` AßÐ b%² ) ÐÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÌÓ  Óà  àòòMara€H.€Sandovalóó,€for€appellant€Rafael€A.€Gonzlez„Vlez.Ð G&—!+ Ðà  àòòJos€C.€Romo„Matienzoóó,€for€appellant€Jos€A.€Ramos„Romero.Ð 'm", Ðà  àòòThomas€F.€Klumperóó,€Assistant€United€States€Attorney,€with€whomÐ ó'C#- ÐòòH.S.€Garcaóó,€United€States€Attorney,€and€òòNelson€Prez„Sosaóó,Ð É($. ÐAssistant€United€States€Attorney,€Senior€Appellate€Attorney,€were€Ð Ÿ)ï$/ Ðon€brief,€for€appellee.Ð u*Å%0 Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àÐ K+›&1 ÐßA€y) °°` dàE<¯` AßÐ ° ÐÌà@,,"ìàOctober€13,€2006ˆÐ •å Ðà  àÌßA€y) °°` d E<@` AßÐ  A‘ ÐÑ  ÑÓÓÙ*!ÙØØÑ8€!–XXdÖXXdÖ8ÑÑ€ÑÓ*°,X°` ¨ ƒX°œX*Óà ` àò òTORRUELLA,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó.ó ó€€On€July€12,€2004,€a€juryÐ ° Ðconvicted€Rafael€A.€Gonzlez„Vlez€("Gonzlez")€and€Jos€A.€Ramos„Ð xÈ ÐRomero€("Ramos")€of€one€count€of€conspiracy€to€distribute€aÐ $t Ðcontrolled€substance€in€violation€of€21€U.S.C.€ðð€846.€€In€addition,Ð Ð  ÐRamos€was€convicted€of€distribution€of€a€controlled€substance€inÐ | Ì Ðviolation€of€21€U.S.C.€ðð€841(a)(2).€€Ramos€and€Gonzlez€now€appealÐ ( x  Ðtheir€convictions€and€their€sentences.Ð Ô$  Ðà@¤¤#ìàò òI.€€òòBackgroundóóó óˆÐ €Ð  Ðà ` àBetween€2000€and€2002,€a€drug€point€known€as€"LasÐ H˜  ÐMalvinas"€was€operated€in€the€Luis€Llorns€Torres€housing€projectÐ ôD Ðin€Puerto€Rico.€€Jos€Luis€Rivera€Gonzlez€("Rivera")€headed€theÐ  ð Ðdrug€point€until€his€death€in€2002.€€Between€the€summer€of€2001€andÐ Lœ ÐOctober€2002,€the€FBI€and€the€Police€of€Puerto€Rico€conducted€anÐ øH Ðinvestigation€of€the€drug€point.€€This€investigation€culminated€inÐ ¤ô Ða€grand€jury€indictment€on€February€13,€2003€against€nine€personsÐ P  Ðincluding€Gonzlez€and€Ramos.€€The€indictment€charged€Gonzlez€andÐ üL ÐRamos€with€conspiracy€to€distribute€controlled€substances€includingÐ ¨ø  Ðcocaine,€crack€cocaine,€heroin€and€marijuana€in€violation€of€21Ð T!¤" ÐU.S.C.€ðð€846.€€The€indictment€also€charged€Ramos€with€distributionÐ #P$ Ðof€a€controlled€substance€in€violation€of€21€U.S.C.€ðð€841(a)(2).€Ð ¬$ü& ÐFive€of€the€seven€other€defendants€charged€in€the€indictmentÐ X&¨!( Ðpleaded€guilty;€two€others€were€tried€separately.€€Gonzlez€andÐ (T#* ÐRamos€proceeded€to€trial€on€June€30,€2004.Ð °)%, ÐÐ \+¬&. Ðò òà@´´!ìàA.€€Jury€Selectionó óˆÐ ° Ðà ` àFifty„six€jurors€were€summoned€and€appeared€for€trial.€Ð xÈ ÐDuring€òòvoir€direóó,€Gonzlez€requested€and€the€district€court€agreedÐ $t Ðto€ask€potential€jurors€whether€they€lived€or€had€lived€in€a€publicÐ Ð  Ðhousing€project.€€No€juror€answered€affirmatively.€€After€òòvoir€direóóÐ | Ì Ðconcluded€and€the€jury€was€announced,€Ramos€objected€to€theÐ ( x  Ðcomposition€of€the€jury,€arguing€that€it€had€"probably€no€poorÐ Ô$  Ðclass€or€anybody€relating€to€the€public€housing€residence"€and€thatÐ €Ð  Ðpublic€housing€residents€formed€a€distinct€class.׃×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€GonzlezÐ ,|  Ðconcurred€in€Ramos'€objection.€€The€court€overruled€the€defendants'Ð Ø( Ðobjection€to€jury€composition.Ð „Ô Ðò òà@àà$ìàB.€€The€Trialó óˆÐ 0€ Ðà ` àAt€trial,€the€Government€presented€testimony€from€FBIÐ øH ÐAgent€William€Ortiz€regarding€his€surveillance€of€the€Malvinas€drugÐ ¤ô Ðpoint.€€The€Government€also€presented€four€hours€and€thirty„fiveÐ P  Ðminutes€of€videotapes€from€a€surveillance€camera€placed€near€theÐ üL Ðdrug€point€that€showed€numerous€drug€transactions.€€Police€ofÐ ¨ø  ÐPuerto€Rico€Officer€Felipe€Casiano€Caraballo€("Casiano")€testifiedÐ T!¤" Ðthat€he€had€observed€both€Ramos€and€Gonzlez€near€the€drug€pointÐ #P$ Ðand€had€"intervened"€with€Ramos€on€a€number€of€occasions.€€OnÐ ¬$ü& Ðcross„examination,€Casiano€admitted€that€he€had€never€observedÐ X&¨!( ÐGonzlez€committing€a€crime.€€Jess€Matas€Cruz€("Matas"),€aÐ ° Ðcooperating€witness,€testified€that€he€had€observed€drug€sales€atÐ \¬ Ðthe€drug€point€and€had€observed€Ramos€with€two€weapons€while€in€theÐ X Ðcompany€of€Rivera.€€Matas€also€testified€that€he€and€Ramos€"cut"Ð ´  Ða€"baseball„sized"€rock€of€crack€for€packaging,€during€which€RamosÐ ` ° Ðtold€him€that€the€rock€had€been€provided€by€Gonzlez.€€MatasÐ  \  Ðfurther€testified€that€he€had€overheard€Rivera€asking€Gonzlez€forÐ ¸  Ð"pepper,"€which€was€purportedly€a€code„word€for€cocaine,€and€thatÐ d´  Ðhe€later€observed€Gonzlez€providing€Rivera€with€a€large€plasticÐ `  Ðbag€with€"stones"€or€"bricks"€inside.€€Matas€also€made€a€recordingÐ ¼  Ðof€a€conversation€between€Rivera€and€Gonzlez€about€the€packaging,Ð h¸ Ðprocessing,€and€payment€for€cocaine.€€In€addition,€Angel€Obregð;ðnÐ d ÐFontnez€("Obregð;ðn"),€one€of€the€defendants€charged€in€theÐ À Ðindictment€who€pleaded€guilty,€testified€that€he€had€observedÐ l¼ ÐGonzlez€selling€between€one„eighth€and€one„half€kilogram€ofÐ h Ðcocaine€on€credit€to€Rivera.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€Obregð;ðn€also€testified€that€RamosÐ Ä Ðwas€a€processor€of€drugs€and€a€"triggerman"€for€the€enterprise.€Ð pÀ  ÐLastly,€the€Government€offered€physical€evidence,€including€aÐ !l" Ðnotebook€(the€"ledger")€containing€records€of€cocaine€transactionsÐ È"$ Ðinvolving€a€person€named€"Junito,"€which€was€Gonzlez's€nickname.€Ð t$Ä& ÐAt€the€conclusion€of€the€Government's€case,€Gonzlez€and€RamosÐ ° Ðmoved€for€judgments€of€acquittal€under€Fed.€R.€Crim.€P.€29(a)׃×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×.€Ð \¬ ÐThe€court€denied€the€motions.Ð X Ðà ` àGonzlez€presented€four€character€witnesses€on€hisÐ ´  Ðbehalf,€all€of€whom€testified€that€Gonzlez€was€law„abiding€and€hadÐ ` ° Ðgood€character.€€Gonzlez€and€Ramos€again€moved€for€judgments€ofÐ  \  Ðacquittal€under€Fed.€R.€Crim.€P.€29(a)€after€the€defense€caseÐ ¸  Ðconcluded;€the€motions€were€denied.Ð d´  Ðà@| | ìàò òC.€€The€Jury€Charge€and€Verdict€Formó óˆÐ `  Ðà ` àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€trial,€all€parties€attended€aÐ Ø( Ðjury€charge€conference.€€At€the€conference,€Ramos€objected€to€theÐ „Ô Ðverdict€form€and€requested€a€bifurcated€verdict€which€would€haveÐ 0€ Ðrequired€the€jury€to€find€the€specific€amount€of€drugs€attributableÐ Ü, Ðto€each€defendant.€€The€court€denied€the€request.€€The€court€gaveÐ ˆØ Ðthe€jury,€in€part,€the€following€charge:Ð 4„ ÐÓÓà8 ` àCount€one€of€the€indictment€charges€that€the€Ð à0 Ðdefendants€conspired€with€one€another€toÐ ¶ Ðdistribute€controlled€substances,€that€is€toÐ ŒÜ  Ðsay,€five€kilograms€or€more€of€cocaine€and€aÐ b ²! Ðdetectable€amount€of€cocaine€base,€bothÐ 8!ˆ" ÐSchedule€II€narcotic€drug€controlledÐ "^# Ðsubstances.€.€.€.€€To€find€any€defendantÐ ä"4$ Ðguilty€of€conspiracy€to€distribute€controlledÐ ° Ð[sic]€you€must€be€convinced€that€theÐ †Ö Ðgovernment€has€proven€each€of€the€followingÐ \¬ Ðthings€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt:€€First,€thatÐ 2‚ Ðthe€agreement€specified€in€the€indictment,€andÐ X Ðnot€some€other€agreement€or€agreements,Ð Þ. Ðexisted€between€at€least€two€people€toÐ ´  Ðdistribute€controlled€substances;€and€Second,Ð Š Ú Ðthat€the€defendants€knowingly€and€willfullyÐ ` ° Ðjoined€in€that€agreement.€.€.€.€€To€find€aÐ 6 †  Ðdefendant€guilty€of€the€offense€charged€in€theÐ  \  Ðindictment,€you€do€not€have€to€find€that€theÐ â 2  Ðdefendant€conspired€to€distribute€the€specificÐ ¸  Ðamount€of€controlled€substances€alleged€in€theÐ ŽÞ  Ðindictment.€€To€find€a€defendant€guilty,€youÐ d´  Ðneed€only€find€that€he€conspired€to€distributeÐ :Š  Ðsome€quantity€of€controlled€substances€asÐ `  Ðalleged€in€count€one.€€If€you€find€that€aÐ æ6 Ðdefendant€conspired€to€distribute€someÐ ¼  Ðquantity€of€controlled€substance,€you€will€beÐ ’â Ðasked€to€make€a€special€finding€as€to€theÐ h¸ Ðquantity€of€controlled€substance€that€heÐ >Ž Ðconspired€to€distribute.€.€.€.€€BothÐ d Ðdefendants€are€named€in€count€one€of€theÐ ê: Ðindictment.€€The€evidence€pertaining€to€eachÐ À Ðdefendant€should€be€considered€separately€andÐ –æ Ðindividually.€€The€fact€that€you€may€find€ofÐ l¼ Ð[sic]€the€defendants€guilty€or€not€guilty,Ð B’ Ðshould€not€control€your€verdict€as€to€theÐ h Ðother€defendant.Ðî>` x` x ÐÌÓ‘'Óà ` àNeither€party€objected€to€the€jury€charge.€€The€jury€wasÐ šê Ðgiven€a€verdict€form€which€asked€the€jury€to€determine€the€guilt€ofÐ F –! Ðeach€defendant€and€included€a€special€interrogatory€which€asked€theÐ ò!B# Ðâ âjury€to€find€if€the€amount€of€cocaine€involved€in€the€conspiracyÐ ž#î% Ðwas€five€kilograms€or€more.׃×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€At€the€request€of€the€Government,€theÐ ° Ðverdict€form€was€read€to€the€jury.Ð \¬ Ðâ âà ` àOn€July€12,€2004,€the€jury€returned€a€verdict€findingÐ X Ðboth€defendants€guilty€of€the€charged€offenses€and€a€specialÐ ´  Ðverdict€finding€that€the€amount€of€cocaine€involved€in€theÐ ` ° Ðconspiracy€was€five€kilograms€or€more.€€After€the€verdict,€Gonzlez€Ð  \  Ðmade€a€renewed€motion€for€a€judgment€of€acquittal€under€Fed.€R.Ð ¸  ÐCrim.€P.€29(c)(1),׃˜ ×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€which€was€denied.€€Ramos€filed€a€motion€toÐ d´  Ðvacate€the€conviction€and€for€a€new€trial€under€Fed.€R.€Crim.€P.Ð `  Ð33(a).׃ ¸×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€court€denied€the€motion.Ð  ¼  Ðò òà@¤¤#ìàD.€€Sentencingó óˆÐ ° Ðà ` àPre„sentencing€reports€were€transmitted€to€bothÐ xÈ Ðdefendants.€€On€December€23,€2004,€the€court€held€a€sentencingÐ $t Ðhearing€for€Gonzlez.€€During€the€hearing,€Gonzlez€argued€that€theÐ Ð  Ðcourt€needed€to€make€an€individualized€finding€of€drug€quantity.€Ð | Ì ÐThe€court€responded€that€this€was€a€matter€reserved€to€the€jury,Ð ( x  Ðand€that€the€jury€had€already€rendered€a€sufficient€finding.€€TheÐ Ô$  Ðcourt€determined€an€offense€level€of€thirty„two€based€on€theÐ €Ð  Ðminimum€of€five€kilograms€of€cocaine€involved€in€the€conspiracy€andÐ ,|  Ða€criminal€history€category€of€I.€€The€sentencing€guidelinesÐ Ø( Ðrecommended€a€range€of€121€to€151€months€of€imprisonment;€GonzlezÐ „Ô Ðwas€sentenced€to€135€months€in€prison.Ð 0€ Ðà ` àOn€April€8,€2005,€the€court€held€a€sentencing€hearing€forÐ Ü, ÐRamos.€€The€court€determined€that€Ramos€was€a€career€offender€underÐ ˆØ ÐU.S.S.G.€ðð€4B1.1,€which€gave€him€a€criminal€history€category€of€VI.€Ð 4„ ÐFor€the€conspiracy€charge,€the€court€determined€an€offense€level€ofÐ à0 Ðthirty„seven€based€on€the€minimum€of€five€kilograms€of€cocaineÐ ŒÜ  Ðinvolved€in€the€conspiracy€and€the€fact€that€Ramos€was€a€careerÐ 8!ˆ" Ðoffender.€€The€sentencing€guidelines€recommended€a€range€of€360Ð ä"4$ Ðmonths€to€life€imprisonment;€Ramos€was€sentenced€to€365€months€of€Ð $à& Ðimprisonment€on€the€conspiracy€charge.€€On€the€distribution€charge,Ð <&Œ!( ÐRamos€was€sentenced€to€sixty€months€of€imprisonment€to€be€servedÐ è'8#* Ðâ âconsecutively€with€the€sentence€for€conspiracy.€€Gonzlez€and€RamosÐ ”)ä$, Ðnow€present€various€challenges€to€their€convictions€and€sentencesÐ ° Ðon€appeal.Ð \¬ Ðâ âà@hh#ìàò òII.€€òòDiscussionóóó óˆÐ X Ðà ` àWe€will€first€address€the€claims€made€jointly€by€GonzlezÐ Ð  Ðand€Ramos€regarding€the€jury€instructions€and€special€verdict€form,Ð | Ì Ðand€then€proceed€to€Gonzlez's€and€Ramos'€individual€claims.Ð ( x  Ðò òà@44ìàA.€€The€Jury€Instructions€and€Special€Verdict€Formó óˆÐ Ô$  Ðà ` àThe€essence€of€Gonzlez's€and€Ramos'€appeals€as€to€theÐ œì  Ðjury€instructions€and€special€verdict€form€can€be€boiled€down€toÐ H˜  Ðtwo€arguments.€€First,€Gonzlez€and€Ramos€argue€that€to€be€foundÐ ôD Ðguilty€of€conspiracy€to€distribute€a€controlled€substance,€the€juryÐ  ð Ðinstructions€and€the€special€verdict€form€should€have€required€theÐ Lœ Ðjury€to€make€individualized€findings€of€the€amount€of€cocaineÐ øH Ðattributable€to€each€defendant€rather€than€to€the€conspiracy€as€aÐ ¤ô Ðwhole.€€Second,€Gonzlez€and€Ramos€argue€that€the€Supreme€Court'sÐ P  Ðholdings€in€òòApprendióó€v.€òòNew€Jerseyóó,€530€U.S.€466€(2000),€andÐ üL ÐòòBlakelyóó€v.€òòWashingtonóó,€542€U.S.€296€(2004),€required€individualizedÐ ¨ø  Ðfindings€as€to€drug€quantity€for€the€purposes€of€sentencing.€€WeÐ T!¤" Ðfind€both€claims€to€be€meritless.Ð #P$ Ðà ` àIn€order€to€determine€whether€"all€factual€issuesÐ ¬$ü& Ðessential€to€the€judgment€.€.€.€were€fairly€presented€to€the€jury,"Ð X&¨!( Ðwe€review€properly€preserved€objections€to€the€trial€court's€juryÐ (T#* Ðinstructions€and€verdict€forms€òòde€novoóó.€€òòSnchez„Lð;ðpezóó€v.€òòFuentes„Ð °)%, ÐPujolsóó,€375€F.3d€121,€134€(1st€Cir.€2004)€(internal€quotation€marksÐ \+¬&. Ðand€citation€omitted).€€If€the€objection€to€jury€instructions€orÐ ° Ðverdict€forms€has€not€been€properly€preserved€by€the€defendants,€weÐ \¬ Ðreview€newly€raised€objections€using€a€plain€error€standard.׃S×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòId.óó€Ð X ÐTo€satisfy€the€plain€error€standard,€a€criminal€defendant€mustÐ ´  Ðshow:€"(1)€that€an€error€occurred€(2)€which€was€clear€or€obviousÐ ` ° Ðand€which€not€only€(3)€affected€the€defendant's€substantial€rights,Ð  \  Ðbut€also€(4)€seriously€impaired€the€fairness,€integrity,€or€publicÐ ¸  Ðreputation€of€judicial€proceedings."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòDuarteóó,€246Ð d´  ÐF.3d€56,€60€(1st€Cir.€2001).€€This€standard€is€exceedinglyÐ `  Ðdifficult€to€satisfy€in€jury€instruction€cases:€"[T]he€plain€errorÐ ¼  Ðhurdle,€high€in€all€events,€nowhere€looms€larger€than€in€theÐ h¸ Ðcontext€of€alleged€instructional€errors."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð d ÐòòÔ_ÔPaniaguaÔ_Ô-Ramosóó,€251€F.3d€242,€246€(1st€Cir.€2001).Ð À Ðò òà@ìà1.€€The€Jury€Instructionsó óˆÐ l¼ Ðà ` àNeither€Gonzlez€nor€Ramos€entered€any€objections€to€theÐ 4„ Ðjury€instructions.€€Thus,€we€will€look€to€see€if€the€instructionsÐ à0 Ðconstituted€plain€error.€€Our€examination€of€jury€instructionsÐ ŒÜ  Ðfocuses€on€"whether€they€adequately€explained€the€law€or€whetherÐ 8!ˆ" Ðthey€tended€to€confuse€or€mislead€the€jury€on€the€controllingÐ ° Ðissues."€€òòFedericoóó€v.€òòOrder€of€Saint€Benedictóó,€64€F.3d€1,€4€(1stÐ \¬ ÐCir.€1995).Ð X Ðà ` àGonzlez€and€Ramos€were€charged€with€conspiracy€toÐ ´  Ðdistribute€controlled€substances€under€21€U.S.C.€ðð€846.€€TheÐ ` ° Ðelements€of€a€conspiracy€are€"the€existence€of€a€conspiracy,€theÐ  \  Ðdefendant's€knowledge€of€the€conspiracy,€and€the€defendant'sÐ ¸  Ðvoluntary€participation€in€the€conspiracy."€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð d´  ÐòòGð;ðmez-Pabð;ðnóó,€911€F.2d€847,€852€(1st€Cir.€1990).€€The€quantity€ofÐ `  Ðdrugs€is€not€an€element€of€conspiracy€under€ðð€846,€nor€is€it€anÐ ¼  Ðelement€of€the€underlying€controlled€substances€offense€under€ðð841Ð h¸ Ð(a)(2).€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòÔ_ÔLindiaÔ_Ôóó,€82€F.3d€1154,€1160€(1st€Cir.Ð d Ð1996).׃×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€district€court's€instructions€plainly€instructed€theÐ À Ðjury€to€consider€the€aforementioned€elements€of€conspiracy€for€eachÐ l¼ Ðdefendant,€explicitly€stating€that,€"[T]he€evidence€pertaining€toÐ h Ðeach€defendant€should€be€considered€separately€and€individually."€Ð Ä ÐIt€was€only€after€each€defendant's€culpability€was€determinedÐ ° Ðindividually€that€the€jury€was€asked€to€find€the€conspiracy„wideÐ \¬ Ðdrug€quantity„„a€finding€that€the€court€would€need€for€sentencing.€Ð X ÐAs€we€have€stated,€"the€maximum€statutory€penalty€available€to€theÐ ´  Ðdistrict€court€at€sentencing€for€a€defendant€convicted€of€a€drugÐ ` ° Ðconspiracy€is€based€on€the€drug€quantity€and€amount€reflected€inÐ  \  Ðthe€jury€verdict€attributable€to€the€conspiracy€as€a€whole."€Ð ¸  ÐòòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòIrizarryóó,€404€F.3d€497,€504€(1st€Cir.€2005).׃×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рd´  ÐBecause€the€jury€was€instructed€to€consider€the€charges€againstÐ `  Ðeach€defendant€individually,€the€instructions€did€not€constituteÐ ¼  Ðerror€as€to€the€finding€of€guilt.Ð h¸ Ðà ` àFurthermore,€the€jury€instructions€did€not€constituteÐ d Ðerror€under€òòApprendióó€or€òòBlakelyóó,€which€require€a€jury€to€make€aÐ À Ðfactual€finding€for€any€element€which€increases€a€defendant'sÐ l¼ Ðsentence€beyond€the€statutory€òòmaximumóó€penalty.€€530€U.S.€at€490;Ð h Ð542€U.S.€at€301.€€The€district€court€instructed€the€jury€to€findÐ Ä Ðthe€amount€of€cocaine€involved€in€the€conspiracy€as€a€whole.׃Z”×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€TheÐ pÀ  Ðamount€of€cocaine€involved€in€the€conspiracy€sets€the€statutoryÐ ° Ðmaximum€penalty€for€ðð€846.€€òòIrizarryóó,€404€F.3d€at€504.€€Thus,€theÐ \¬ Ðinstructions€to€determine€only€the€conspiracy„wide€amount€ofÐ X Ðcocaine€posed€no€risk€that€the€jury€would€fail€to€find€an€elementÐ ´  Ðof€the€offense€that€increased€the€statutory€maximum€penalty.€Ð ` ° ÐAccordingly,€the€jury€instructions€did€not€constitute€error€as€toÐ  \  Ðsentencing.Ð ¸  Ðà@\ \ ìàò ò2.€€The€Special€Verdict€Formó óˆÐ d´  Ðà ` àBecause€Ramos€made€a€timely€objection€to€the€verdictÐ ,|  Ðform,€we€will€review€the€verdict€form€òòde€novoóó€as€to€his€claims.€Ð Ø( ÐGonzlez€made€no€such€objection;€his€claims€will€be€reviewed€forÐ „Ô Ðplain€error.€€The€purpose€of€a€special€verdict€form€is€to€allowÐ 0€ Ð"juries€to€specifically€identify€the€predicates€for€the€generalÐ Ü, Ðverdict."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòCiancióó,€378€F.3d€71,€91€(1st€Cir.Ð ˆØ Ð2004).€€In€the€present€case,€the€verdict€form€asked€the€jury€toÐ 4„ Ðmake€a€finding€of€guilty€or€not€guilty€as€to€each€defendant€forÐ à0 Ðeach€charge€and€then,€if€either€defendant€was€found€guilty,€askedÐ ŒÜ  Ðthe€jury€to€determine€the€amount€of€cocaine€involved€in€theÐ 8!ˆ" Ðconspiracy.€€As€we€have€already€stated,€neither€the€offense€ofÐ ä"4$ Ðconspiracy,€òòÔ_ÔLindiaÔ_Ôóó,€82€F.3d€at€1160,€nor€the€determination€of€theÐ $à& Ðmaximum€penalty€for€conspiracy,€òòIrizarryóó,€404€F.3d€at€504,€requiresÐ <&Œ!( Ðan€individualized€finding€of€the€amount€of€drugs€attributable€to€aÐ è'8#* Ðspecific€defendant.€€Rather,€the€amount€of€drugs€involved€in€theÐ ° Ðconspiracy€as€a€whole€is€a€predicate€for€sentencing€purposes.€€òòSeeóóÐ \¬ Ðòòid.óó€€Because€the€special€verdict€form€provided€for€individualizedÐ X Ðfindings€of€guilt€on€each€charge,€the€special€verdict€form€wouldÐ ´  Ðnot€have€misled€or€confused€the€jury€as€to€their€determination€ofÐ ` ° Ðguilt.€€Thus,€the€special€verdict€form€did€not€constitute€error€asÐ  \  Ðto€the€finding€of€guilt.Ð ¸  Ðà ` àFurthermore,€there€were€no€òòApprendióó€or€òòBlakelyóó€errors€inÐ d´  Ðthe€special€verdict€form.€€The€jury€used€the€special€verdict€formÐ `  Ðto€make€a€finding€of€conspiracy„wide€drug€quantity.€€The€quantityÐ ¼  Ðof€drugs€in€the€conspiracy€determines€the€statutory€maximumÐ h¸ Ðsentence.׃[×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSeeóó€òòIrizarryóó,€404€F.3d€at€504.€€Thus,€because€theÐ d Ðstatutory€maximum€was€determined€by€the€conspiracy„wide€drugÐ À Ðquantity,€there€was€no€need€under€òòApprendióó€or€òòBlakelyóó€for€theÐ l¼ Ðspecial€verdict€form€to€allow€jurors€to€make€an€individualizedÐ h Ðdetermination€of€drug€quantity€for€each€defendant.€€Accordingly,Ð Ä Ðthe€special€verdict€form€did€not€constitute€error€as€to€sentencing.Ð pÀ  ÐÐ  !l" Ðò òà@ ìàB.€€Claims€Raised€by€Gonzlezó óˆÐ ° Ðà ` àGonzlez€raises€two€claims:€that€there€was€insufficientÐ xÈ Ðevidence€to€find€him€guilty€of€conspiracy€to€commit€drugÐ $t Ðtrafficking€under€21€U.S.C.€ðð€846€and€that€the€sentence€he€receivedÐ Ð  Ðwas€not€issued€in€accordance€with€our€decisions€in€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð | Ì ÐòòColð;ðn„Solsóó,€354€F.3d€101€(1st€Cir.€2004),€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð ( x  ÐòòVsquez„Molinaóó,€389€F.3d€54€(1st€Cir.€2004),€or€the€Supreme€Court'sÐ Ô$  Ðdecision€in€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòBookeróó,€543€U.S.€220€(2005).Ð €Ð  Ðà@ ìàò ò1.€€Insufficiency€of€Evidenceó óˆÐ ,|  Ðà ` àGonzlez€argues€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€wasÐ ôD Ðinsufficient€for€a€jury€to€find€him€guilty€of€conspiracy€toÐ  ð Ðdistribute€cocaine.€€We€will€review€òòde€novoóó€a€district€court'sÐ Lœ Ðdenial€of€a€defendant's€motion€for€acquittal€under€Fed.€R.€Crim.€P.Ð øH Ð29.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòRivera€Ruizóó,€244€F.3d€263,€266€(1st€Cir.Ð ¤ô Ð2001).€€The€standard€is€whether€the€evidence,€"taken€in€the€lightÐ P  Ðmost€amicable€to€the€prosecution,€together€with€all€reasonableÐ üL Ðinferences€favorable€to€it,€would€allow€a€rational€fact„finder€toÐ ¨ø  Ðconclude€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€was€guilty€asÐ T!¤" Ðcharged."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòÔ_ÔMarajÔ_Ôóó,€947€F.2d€520,€523€(1st€Cir.Ð #P$ Ð1991).€€The€Government€"need€not€exclude€every€reasonableÐ ¬$ü& Ðhypothesis€of€innocence,€provided€the€record€as€a€whole€supports€aÐ X&¨!( Ðconclusion€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð (T#* Ðâ âòòVictoria-Pegueroóó,€920€F.2d€77,€86-87€(1st€Cir.€1990).Ð °)%, Ðà ` àGonzlez€was€charged€with€conspiracy€to€distributeÐ ° Ðâ âcocaine€under€21€U.S.C.€ðð€846.€€To€prove€that€Gonzlez€was€guiltyÐ \¬ Ðof€conspiracy€to€distribute€cocaine,€the€Government€needed€to€proveÐ X Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt€"that€an€agreement€existed€to€commit€theÐ ´  Ðunderlying€substantive€offense€(here,€the€distribution€of€drugs),Ð ` ° Ðthat€the€defendant€knew€of€the€agreement,€and€that€he€opted€to€joinÐ  \  Ðin€it,€intending€to€commit€the€substantive€offense."€€òòUnited€StatesóóÐ ¸  Ðv.€òòGð;ðmezóó,€255€F.3d€31,€35€(1st€Cir.€2001).€€During€the€trial,€theÐ d´  ÐGovernment€offered€testimony€from€an€FBI€agent,€a€Police€of€PuertoÐ `  ÐRico€officer,€two€cooperating€witnesses,€as€well€as€hours€ofÐ ¼  Ðvideotape€that,€taken€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theÐ h¸ Ðprosecution,€shows€that€Rivera€and€others€agreed€to€distributeÐ d Ðcocaine€and€other€drugs€at€the€Malvinas€drug€point.€€A€jury€couldÐ À Ðreasonably€infer€from€the€testimony€of€the€two€cooperatingÐ l¼ Ðwitnesses€regarding€the€sales€of€cocaine€by€Gonzlez€to€Rivera,€theÐ h Ðaudiotape€recordings€of€Gonzlez's€conversations,€and€the€presenceÐ Ä Ðof€Gonzlez's€name€in€the€ledger,€that€Gonzlez€was€aware€of€theÐ pÀ  Ðconspiracy€to€distribute€controlled€substances.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€StatesóóÐ !l" Ðv.€òòOrtizóó,€966€F.2d€707,€712€(1st€Cir.€1992)€("[Ô_ÔF]actfindersÔ_Ô€mayÐ È"$ Ðdraw€reasonable€inferences€from€the€evidence€based€on€sharedÐ t$Ä& Ðperceptions€and€understandings€of€the€habits,€practices,€andÐ  &p!( Ðinclinations€of€human€beings.").€€A€jury€could€further€infer€fromÐ Ì'#* Ðthe€testimony€about€Gonzlez's€regular€sales€of€cocaine€to€RiveraÐ x)È$, Ðthat€Gonzlez€joined€the€agreement€for€the€purpose€of€and€with€theÐ $+t&. Ðintent€to€distribute€cocaine.€€In€light€of€the€substantial€amountÐ ° Ðof€evidence€presented,€the€fact€that€one€witness€could€not€explainÐ \¬ Ðthe€difference€between€an€eighth€and€a€half€kilogram€of€cocaine€orÐ X Ðthat€another€witness€described€the€drugs€as€"stones"€or€"bricks"Ð ´  Ðdoes€not€make€irrational€the€jury's€conclusion€that€Gonzlez€wasÐ ` ° Ðguilty€of€conspiracy.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòNishnianidzeóó,€342€F.3dÐ  \  Ð6,€14€(1st€Cir.€2003)€("[T]he€jury's€duty€is€to€assess€credibility,Ð ¸  Ðand€it€may€accept€or€reject,€in€whole€or€in€part,€any€testimony.").€Ð d´  ÐAccordingly,€we€believe€that€the€court€was€correct€to€denyÐ `  ÐGonzlez's€motion€for€acquittal.Ð ¼  Ðò òà@ ìà2.€€Sentencing€Errorsó óˆÐ h¸ Ðà ` àGonzlez€challenges€his€sentence€on€the€ground€that€theÐ 0€ Ðdistrict€court€refused€to€make€an€individualized€finding€of€theÐ Ü, Ðquantity€of€drugs€that€could€be€attributed€to€his€participation€inÐ ˆØ Ðthe€conspiracy.€€Since€Gonzlez€challenges€the€sentencing€court'sÐ 4„ Ðconclusion€of€law€that€such€a€finding€was€unnecessary,€we€willÐ à0 Ðreview€it€òòde€novoóó.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòBrennickóó,€337€F.3d€107,€110Ð ŒÜ  Ð(1st€Cir.€2003).Ð 8!ˆ" Ðà ` àIn€òòColð;ðn„Solsóó,€we€held€that€"when€a€district€courtÐ ä"4$ Ðdetermines€drug€quantity€for€the€purpose€of€sentencing€a€defendantÐ $à& Ðconvicted€of€participating€in€a€drug-trafficking€conspiracy,€theÐ <&Œ!( Ðcourt€is€required€to€make€an€individualized€finding€as€to€drugÐ è'8#* Ðamounts€attributable€to,€or€foreseeable€by,€that€defendant."€€354Ð ”)ä$, ÐF.3d€at€103.€€A€defendant€can€only€be€sentenced€on€the€basis€ofÐ @+&. Ðdrugs€he€handled,€anticipated€handling,€or€for€drugs€he€couldÐ ° Ðreasonably€foresee€being€used€in€the€conspiracy;€all€of€the€drugsÐ \¬ Ðin€a€conspiracy€may€not€be€automatically€assigned€to€an€individualÐ X Ðdefendant.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòSeplvedaóó,€15€F.3d€1161,€1197€(1stÐ ´  ÐCir.€1993).Ð ` ° Ðà ` àBoth€Gonzlez€and€the€Government€agree€that€theÐ  \  Ðsentencing€court€failed€to€make€such€an€individualized€finding€andÐ ¸  Ðthat€this€constitutes€error.€€Their€only€difference€is€remedy:Ð d´  ÐGonzlez€believes€that€the€jury€needed€to€determine€drug€quantityÐ `  Ðand€thus€a€new€trial€is€merited,€whereas€the€Government€believesÐ ¼  Ðthat€a€judge€could€make€the€determination€without€the€jury€andÐ h¸ Ðresentencing€would€be€sufficient.€€On€this€subject,€we€have€beenÐ d Ðquite€clear:€"[O]nce€the€jury€has€determined€that€the€conspiracyÐ À Ðinvolved€a€type€and€quantity€of€drugs€sufficient€to€justify€aÐ l¼ Ðsentence€above€the€default€statutory€maximum€and€has€found€aÐ h Ðparticular€defendant€guilty€of€participation€in€the€conspiracy,€theÐ Ä Ðjudge€lawfully€may€determine€the€drug€quantity€attributable€to€thatÐ pÀ  Ðdefendant€and€sentence€him€accordingly."€€òòÔ_ÔDermanÔ_Ôóó€v.€òòUnited€Statesóó,Ð !l" Ð298€F.3d€34,€43€(1st€Cir.€2002).€€The€principal€enunciated€inÐ È"$ ÐòòÔ_ÔDermanÔ_Ôóó€survives€the€Supreme€Court's€subsequent€decisions€in€òòBlakelyóóÐ t$Ä& Ðand€òòBookeróó.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€Ô_Ôv.Ô_Ô€òòÔ_ÔMaloufÔ_Ôóó,€No.€05„2245€(1st€Cir.Ð  &p!( ÐOct.€Ô_Ô13,Ô_Ô€2006).€€Consequently,€we€remand€Gonzlez's€case€forÐ Ì'#* Ðresentencing€in€accordance€with€our€decisions.€€Because€we€haveÐ x)È$, Ðremanded€Gonzlez's€case€for€resentencing€on€this€ground,€we€do€notÐ $+t&. Ðneed€to€decide€now€the€merits€of€Gonzlez's€other€sentencingÐ ° Ðclaims.Ð \¬ Ðò òà@Ô Ô ìàC.€€Claims€Raised€by€Ramosó óˆÐ X Ðà ` àRamos€makes€two€claims.€€First,€Ramos€argues€that€theÐ Ð  Ðtrial€was€flawed€because€jury€selection€violated€the€SixthÐ | Ì ÐAmendment€and€the€Supreme€Court's€decisions€in€òòTayloróó€v.€òòLouisianaóó,Ð ( x  Ð419€U.S.€522€(1975),€and€òòDurenóó€v.€òòMissourióó,€439€U.S.€357€(1979),Ð Ô$  Ðrequiring€that€juries€be€selected€from€a€pool€representative€of€theÐ €Ð  Ðcommunity€at€large.€€Ramos€argues€that€the€jury€pool€was€flawedÐ ,|  Ðbecause€it€did€not€include€persons€who€lived€in€public€housing.€Ð Ø( ÐSecond,€Ramos€argues€that€his€sentence€was€flawed€under€òòApprendióó,Ð „Ô Ð530€U.S.€366,€and€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòVaughnóó,€430€F.3d€518€(2d€Cir.Ð 0€ Ð2005),€because€the€jury€did€not€find€that€Ramos€was€individuallyÐ Ü, Ðinvolved€in€the€distribution€of€five€kilograms€of€cocaine€and€thusÐ ˆØ Ðthe€court€could€not€sentence€him€using€the€maximum€penalty€set€byÐ 4„ Ð21€U.S.C.€ðð€841(b)(1)(A).Ð à0 Ðò òà@´´!ìà1.€€Jury€Selectionó óˆÐ ŒÜ  Ðà ` àWe€review€òòde€novoóó€a€district€court's€rulings€of€law.€Ð T!¤" ÐòòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòRoyalóó,€174€F.3d€1,€5€(1st€Cir.€1999).€€TheÐ #P$ Ðdistrict€court€denied€Ramos'€motion€for€a€new€trial€on€the€groundÐ ¬$ü& Ðthat€the€jury€pool€was€unfairly€composed.€€In€order€to€establish€aÐ X&¨!( Ðclaim€that€the€jury€selection€process€violates€the€constitutionalÐ (T#* Ðrequirement€that€the€jury€be€selected€from€a€pool€representative€ofÐ °)%, Ðthe€community€at€large,€the€challenging€party€must€establish:€"(1)Ð \+¬&. Ðthat€the€group€alleged€to€be€excluded€is€a€'distinctive'€group€inÐ ° Ðthe€community;€(2)€that€the€representation€of€this€group€òòin€Ô_ÔveniresÔ_ÔóóÐ \¬ Ðfrom€which€juries€are€selected€is€not€fair€and€reasonable€inÐ X Ðrelation€to€the€number€of€such€persons€in€the€community;€and€(3)Ð ´  Ðthat€this€Ô_ÔunderrepresentationÔ_Ô€is€due€to€systematic€exclusion€of€theÐ ` ° Ðgroup€in€the€jury-selection€process."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòBenjaminóó,Ð  \  Ð252€F.3d€1,€12€(1st€Cir.€2001)€(citing€òòDurenóó,€439€U.S.€at€364).€Ð ¸  ÐThe€burden€is€on€the€challenging€party€to€establish€a€case€ofÐ d´  Ðunconstitutional€Ô_ÔunderrepresentationÔ_Ô.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòPionóó,€25Ð `  ÐF.3d€18,€22€(1st€Cir.€1994).Ð ¼  Ðà ` àRamos€has€presented€no€evidence€that€would€establish€anyÐ h¸ Ðone€of€the€three€prongs€of€the€òòDurenóó€test.€€As€for€the€first€prong,Ð d ÐRamos€admits€that€there€is€no€case€law€supporting€the€argument€thatÐ À Ðpublic€housing€residents€are€a€distinctive€group.€€Ramos€arguesÐ l¼ Ðthat€public€housing€residents€form€a€distinctive€group€because€theÐ h ÐDepartment€of€Housing€and€Urban€Development€restricts€eligibilityÐ Ä Ðfor€public€housing.€€This€argument€is€clearly€insufficient€„„€itÐ pÀ  Ðwould€allow€a€defendant€to€make€a€constitutional€claim€out€of€theÐ !l" Ðfact€that€a€jury€pool€lacked€a€person€from€any€group€that€limitsÐ È"$ Ðits€membership.€€See€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòLynchóó,€792€F.2d€269,€271€(1stÐ t$Ä& ÐCir.€1986)€("[I]f€this€grouping€qualifies€as€a€'cognizable€group'Ð  &p!( Ðfor€purposes€of€òòDurenóó€v.€òòMissourióó€analysis,€it€is€hard€to€see€whatÐ Ì'#* Ðgrouping€will€not€similarly€qualify.€The€result€could€soon€be€thatÐ x)È$, Ðany€defendant€showing€that€the€òòvenireóó€deviated€statistically€fromÐ $+t&. Ða€perfect€community€cross-section€would€have€established€a€primaÐ ° Ðfacie€violation€of€the€Sixth€Amendment.").Ð \¬ Ðà ` àFurthermore,€Ramos€has€presented€no€evidence€that€theÐ X Ðrepresentation€of€public€housing€residents€in€the€jury€pool€isÐ ´  Ðunfairly€or€unreasonably€disproportionate.€€Counsel€for€Ramos€toldÐ ` ° Ðthe€court€that€he€estimated€that€public€housing€residents€formedÐ  \  Ðbetween€30%€and€40%€of€Puerto€Rico's€population€but€offered€noÐ ¸  Ðsupport€for€this€contention.€€Ramos€now€uses€the€population€of€justÐ d´  Ðone€of€ten€public€housing€projects€in€Caguas,€a€town€of€142,161Ð `  Ðresidents,€to€conclude€that€10%€is€a€"fair€estimate"€of€theÐ ¼  Ðproportion€of€the€population€of€Puerto€Rico€living€in€publicÐ h¸ Ðhousing.€€No€reasonable€person€would€find€this€evidence€sufficientÐ d Ðto€establish€that,€because€a€jury€pool€of€fifty„six€persons€had€noÐ À Ðpublic€housing€residents,€they€are€unfairly€or€unreasonablyÐ l¼ ÐÔ_ÔunderrepresentedÔ_Ô€in€juries.Ð h Ðà ` àLastly,€Ramos€presents€no€evidence€that€there€has€been€aÐ Ä Ðsystematic€exclusion€of€public€housing€residents.€€To€the€contrary,Ð pÀ  Ðas€the€Government€points€out,€the€Jury€Plan€for€the€United€StatesÐ !l" ÐDistrict€Court€for€the€District€of€Puerto€Rico€forms€its€jury€poolÐ È"$ Ðfrom€voter€registration€lists,€a€method€previously€upheld€by€thisÐ t$Ä& Ðcourt.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòÔ_ÔButeraÔ_Ôóó,€420€F.2d€564,€573€(1st€Cir.Ð  &p!( Ð1970)€("It€has€become€well-established€that€voter€registrationÐ Ì'#* Ðlists€are€appropriate€for€use€in€jury€selection€systems.").€€JurorsÐ x)È$, Ðare€also€required€to€be€United€States€citizens,€at€least€eighteenÐ $+t&. Ðyears€old,€and€residents€of€Puerto€Rico€for€at€least€one€year,€noneÐ ° Ðof€which€would€suggest€systematic€exclusion€of€public€housingÐ \¬ Ðresidents.€€Last,€jurors€are€required€to€be€proficient€in€English,Ð X Ða€requirement€we€have€held€to€be€justified€by€"the€overwhelmingÐ ´  Ðnational€interest€served€by€the€use€of€English€in€a€United€StatesÐ ` ° Ðcourt."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòAponte-Surezóó,€905€F.2d€483,€492€(1stÐ  \  ÐCir.€1990).€€Accordingly,€we€do€not€find€that€Ramos€has€sustainedÐ ¸  Ðhis€Sixth€Amendment€claim€regarding€jury€selection.Ð d´  Ðà@<< ìàò ò2.€€Sentencing€Erroró óˆÐ `  Ðà ` àWe€review€the€legal€conclusions€of€a€sentencing€court€òòdeÐ Ø( Ðnovoóó€but€apply€a€clear€error€standard€to€the€factual€determinationsÐ „Ô Ðof€the€court.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòMateoóó,€271€F.3d€11,€13€(1st€Cir.Ð 0€ Ð2001).€€Ramos€argues€that€his€sentence€violates€the€Supreme€Court'sÐ Ü, Ðdecision€in€òòApprendióó,€530€U.S.€466,€as€interpreted€by€òòUnited€StatesóóÐ ˆØ Ðv.€òòVaughnóó,€430€F.2d€518,€525€(2d€Cir.€2005),€because€the€jury€didÐ 4„ Ðnot€make€an€individualized€finding€that€he€was€involved€with€moreÐ à0 Ðthan€five€kilograms€of€cocaine.׃"×Ý ƒÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Specifically,€Ramos€argues€that,Ð ŒÜ  Ðbecause€the€jury€did€not€find€that€he€was€individually€involvedÐ ° Ðwith€all€five€kilograms€of€cocaine,€the€maximum€sentence€should€beÐ \¬ Ðdictated€by€21€U.S.C.€ðð€841(b)(1)(c),€which€provides€a€maximumÐ X Ðsentence€of€twenty€years€for€the€distribution€of€any€amount€of€aÐ ´  Ðcontrolled€substance.Ð ` ° Ðà ` àIn€òòApprendióó,€the€Supreme€Court€stated€that€"any€fact€thatÐ  \  Ðincreases€the€penalty€for€a€crime€beyond€the€prescribed€statutoryÐ ¸  Ðmaximum€must€be€submitted€to€a€jury."€€530€U.S.€at€490.€€A€juryÐ d´  Ðfound€Ramos€guilty€of€conspiracy€to€distribute€cocaine€under€21Ð `  ÐU.S.C.€ðð€846.€€Section€846€provides€that€a€person€found€guilty€ofÐ ¼  Ðconspiracy€to€distribute€cocaine€shall€be€subject€to€the€penaltiesÐ h¸ Ðfor€the€offense€that€was€the€subject€of€the€conspiracy.€€Thus,Ð d Ðregardless€of€the€amount€of€cocaine€that€he€was€individuallyÐ À Ðinvolved€in€distributing,€Ramos€was€subject€to€the€penalty€imposedÐ l¼ Ðfor€the€conspiracy„wide€amount€of€cocaine.€€After€extensiveÐ h Ðtestimony€by€multiple€witnesses€about€the€precise€quantities€ofÐ Ä Ðcocaine€that€passed€through€the€Las€Malvinas€drug€point€on€a€weeklyÐ pÀ  Ðbasis,€the€jury€found€in€its€special€verdict€that€the€conspiracyÐ !l" Ðinvolved€the€distribution€of€five€or€more€kilograms€of€cocaine.€Ð È"$ ÐUnder€21€U.S.C.€ðð€841(b)(1)(A)(1),€the€maximum€penalty€for€theÐ t$Ä& Ðdistribution€of€five€or€more€kilograms€of€cocaine€is€lifeÐ  &p!( Ðimprisonment.€€Accordingly,€life€imprisonment€is€also€the€maximumÐ Ì'#* Ðpenalty€for€participation€in€a€conspiracy€to€distribute€five€orÐ x)È$, Ðmore€kilograms€of€cocaine.€€Ramos€was€sentenced€to€365€months€ofÐ $+t&. Ðimprisonment€for€his€participation€in€the€conspiracy.€€BecauseÐ ° ÐRamos'€sentence€did€not€exceed€the€statutory€maximum€penalty,€thereÐ \¬ Ðcan€be€no€òòApprendióó€error.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòJohnstoneóó,€251€F.3dÐ X Ð281,€285€(1st€Cir.€2001)€("No€òòApprendióó€violation€occurs,€however,Ð ´  Ðwhen€the€district€court€sentences€a€defendant€below€the€statutoryÐ ` ° Ðmaximum.").€€The€district€court€sentenced€Ramos€to€365€months€of€Ð  \  Ðimprisonment€because€it€found€that€Ramos€was€a€career€offenderÐ ¸  Ðunder€U.S.S.G.€ðð€4B1.1,€and€the€sentencing€guidelines€recommendedÐ d´  Ða€sentencing€range€of€360€months€to€life€imprisonment.€€As€we€haveÐ `  Ðstated€previously,€a€sentence€that€is€less€than€the€statutoryÐ ¼  Ðmaximum€penalty€does€not€violate€òòApprendióó€"even€if€a€factÐ h¸ Ðdetermined€by€the€court€under€a€preponderance€standard€lengthensÐ d Ðthe€sentence€imposed."€€òòJohnstoneóó,€251€F.3d€at€285;€òòsee€alsoóóÐ À ÐòòVaughnóó,€430€F.2d€at€525€("[D]istrict€courts'€authority€to€determineÐ l¼ Ðsentencing€factors€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€endures€andÐ h Ðdoes€not€violate€the€Due€Process€Clause€of€the€Fifth€Amendment.").€Ð Ä ÐAccordingly,€Ramos'€claim€of€improper€sentencing€is€meritless.Ð pÀ  Ðà@hh#ìàò òIII.€òòConclusionó óóóˆÐ !l" Ðà ` àFor€the€reasons€stated€above,€we€vacate€Gonzlez'sÐ ä"4$ Ðsentence€and€remand€the€matter€of€Gonzlez's€sentencing€to€theÐ $à& Ðdistrict€court€for€an€individualized€determination€of€drug€quantityÐ <&Œ!( Ðattributable€to€Gonzlez.€€With€respect€to€all€other€matters,€weÐ è'8#* Ðâ âaffirm€the€decisions€of€the€district€court.Ð ”)ä$, Ðà ` àò òòòThe€conviction€and€sentence€in€No.€05„1758€is€affirmed.€Ð ° Ðâ âThe€conviction€in€No.€05„1184€is€affirmed.€€The€sentence€in€No.€05„Ð xÈ Ð1184€is€vacated€and€that€case€is€remanded€for€resentencingóó.ó ó