ÿWPC" ö –‰Æ¤ý-Þ B/ÚW˜kà!¬ËÕåá²qaÒg¸–°Üá^€ª÷ß;?|AN`ëüÕéP¯º™L‰Î©\yåÙò6²*6`£¦ÁãÖùzÍhõwXöÇ Vñ>ºÐà“^AN*}‰@¦JGß:‡1ÜhÐ^ðÚØör¤ÇÐÒVJÊ¿?¢n®²Mší‘ˆäÏ­“·ñ8/k—¼›ÞhÍxy†3±®Â·ÉÅ& ðÌ0”û3÷{R6Ø—°y›¿>‚wx×ñDøò&ç˜}…!úUŠïN–[y€6â°Çj7ˆ…´–PÃË@ZÜ›17ŽˆA°ß&éûRZ ŠrÊ“Y7`å±]{íÜ饼i‚l`Ǻ–Ül”ýÆØ\µco1Œ†óý|ÆüöU¾¡Eå»íú{voQq Ty²¬à*.'YÔx’cØhô‘8 ZÕ>C¨Ù+Û‰L1÷Ozæó´•E¿ZŸ êŽ*”'/vÕ XG`ÞºOº_¹%7¢ÔëLP/4‹š Ûq¨ÙøÆÞ ÏÎÁûkR€â=Š_>!ðS:c Rðâ-ûø†ÞFp¡w\ž)ã#¥¯ç²õ¸:öS°Eys£0T÷Ö(#É0 %ùU8ÿ 0G7U:~ 0 ¨¸U@`nT Nô ^ ö w 4  ) m+ NB ED fF aH ^\ \ bº U> O 0 DO“²õt*iŒ“®UFÍ-\@@Öœœœ Br"˜HP LaserJet 2100 PCL6,,,,,,,,0X<4šÛ 9Z+‹ Courier New (‚$¡¡Ô€XOXXXÔ<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT(X(2˜[$¤¤Ý ƒ‚!ÝÔ€XæuXXXÔÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman «<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@<þ6X9`(CourierTTXXwþ6X@ÉüQX@a£’6Z …\66Xê:i¢Ø+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀøÀTABLE AL:\JUDGES\Boudin\TEMPLATE\OPINIONS\ALDRICH.WPT- ù-´è\( 9Z+&Courier Regular EÝ ƒ˜[$ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àTwo€members€of€the€504€Boyz€testified€at€the€2003€trial.€Ð ° ÐOne€member€„„€Nathaniel€Fernandes€„„€testified€on€behalf€of€theÐ †Ö Ðgovernment€and€offered€evidence€about€the€quantities€of€drugs€thatÐ \¬ ÐPierre€sold€to€the€504€Boyz.€ò ò€ó óAnother€member€„„€Henry€Sanders€„„Ð 2‚ Ðwas€the€sole€witness€for€Pierre.€ò ò€ó óOn€direct€examination,€SandersÐ f Ðtestified€about€a€source€other€than€Pierre€who€supplied€drugs€toÐ úJ Ðthe€504€Boyz.€ò ò€ó óOn€cross„examination,€however,€Sanders€acknowledgedÐ Ð  Ðthat€he€had€met€Pierre€many€times€when€Pierre€had€come€through€theÐ ´  ÐFifth€Street€area€to€drop€off€drugs,€ò òó óand€he€also€testified€thatÐ Š Ú Ðfrom€1998€to€2001€Pierre€was€Fernandes's€main€source€of€supply.€ò òÐ ` °  Ðó óNone€of€the€504€Boyz€testified€at€the€2004€conspiracy€trial.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒ˜[$ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àIt€is€not€at€all€clear€that€Pierre€makes€any€suchÐ ° Ðargument.€€òòSeeóó€òòZanninoóó,€895€F.2d€at€17. ¸Ý ƒ˜[$ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àThere€was€testimony€suggesting€that€Pierre€fled€inÐ ° ÐLukenson's€car,€although€no€one€observed€the€driver€of€the€car.€ò òÐ †Ö Ðó ó"Lukenson"€and€"Kennisen"€are€phonetically€similar,€and€it€isÐ \¬ Ðpossible€that€the€two€names€refer€to€the€same€person.€€Regardless,Ð 2‚ ÐMickens's€testimony€was€that€she€knew€the€person€who€drove€the€carÐ X Ðfrom€the€Old€Colony€incident,€and€that€he€was€still€involved€whenÐ Þ. Ðshe€joined€the€drug€operation.ò òó ó ëÝ ƒ˜[$ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àPierre€does€not€contest€the€forfeitability€of€theÐ ° Ðearrings. Ý ƒ˜[$ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àThe€district€court€calculated€Pierre's€Guidelines€rangeÐ ° Ðon€the€conspiracy€count€to€be€360€months€to€life.ò òó ó€ ‚Ý ƒ˜[$ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àWe€further€note€that€Congress's€aim€in€enacting€18€U.S.C.Ð ° Ððð3553(a)(6),€which€directs€the€sentencing€court€to€consider€"theÐ †Ö Ðneed€to€avoid€unwarranted€sentence€disparities€among€defendantsÐ \¬ Ðwith€similar€records€who€have€been€found€guilty€of€similarÐ 2‚ Ðconduct,"€"almost€certainly"€was€to€reduce€unwarranted€disparitiesÐ X Ðin€sentencing€on€a€òònationalóó€level.€€òòSaezóó,€444€F.3d€at€18. ¤Ý ƒ˜[$ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àòòóó"[I]n€the€usual€case,€at€least€one€count€in€a€multiple„Ð ° Ðcount€indictment€will€be€able€to€accommodate€the€total€punishmentÐ †Ö Ðfor€the€offenses€of€conviction€....€[W]hen€that€is€so,€'[t]heÐ \¬ Ðsentence€on€each€of€the€other€counts€will€then€be€set€at€the€lesserÐ 2‚ Ðof€the€total€punishment€and€the€applicable€statutory€maximum,€andÐ X Ðbe€made€to€run€concurrently€with€all€or€part€of€the€longestÐ Þ. Ðsentence.'"€òòóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòQuinonesóó,€26€F.3d€213,€215„16€(1stÐ ´  ÐCir.€1994)€(third€alteration€in€original)€(quoting€U.S.S.G.€Ô‡‹j# ‹XXó©ÔððÔ#†Xó©X ‹‹j#:#Ô5G1.2Ð Š Ú Ðcomment)..Courier New Regular #Ñ#€ u Xÿÿd#Ñ RÝ ƒ˜[$ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÓ  ÓÓÓà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àThere€seems€to€be€some€confusion€over€whether€theÐ ° Ðindividual's€name€is€Noel€Lukenson€or€Lukenson€Noel.€€We€refer€toÐ †Ö Ðhim€hereafter€as€Lukenson. StahlDowellMickensBoutinBeausoleilKennisonLukenson BoyzFentonbaggies DktCapeltonChhienarticulableLaughrin EvidZanninoI]ssuesCorreiroFrankhauserArboledaHoulihanforfeitable CrimCauwenberghe t]heGotticaselaw YejeP)rezU.S.S.G.HollidayfactboundDietzJim)nezBeltre PSRVzquez SaezBeausolielDeCiccoreprosecutionVavlitisf]romconspir[ingagree[ingBucuvalas forfeitabilityq]uitej]ustQuinones I]nW]henZiskindDominguezBenitezR]eliefBagleyKennisenCol;nMu9oz dÝ ƒ‚!ÝÔ€Xó©XXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑTRXì3Ø'Xà3Ø' Letter3Ø'Letterÿ3Ø'LetterTÑÑ ? ÑÙ*ƒ ‚!Ùò òÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡X¶­XXXó©ÔÔ‡°~°XX¶­ÔÑ€!ÿ ÑUnited€States€Court€of€AppealsÔ#†X¶­X°°~#ÔÐ ° ÐÔ‡„פ„XX¶­ÔFor€the€First€CircuitÔ#†X¶­X„„פ‰#Ôó óÔ#†Xó©XXX¶­ä#ÔÐ „Ô ÐÓØÓÌÌßA€') °°` dE< ` AßÐ  à ÐÌÌNo.€05„2309Ð K › ÐÌà@ìàUNITED€STATES€OF€AMERICA,ˆÐ ÷ G  ÐÌà@ÐÐ&ìàAppellee,ˆÐ £ó  ÐÌà@tt)ìàv.ˆÐ OŸ  ÐÌà@¤¤#ìàEDWARD€PIERRE,ˆÐ ûK  ÐÌà@ ìàDefendant,€Appellant.ˆÐ §÷ ÐÌßA€') °°` dE<R` AßÐ S£ ÐÌà@œ œ ìàà@@œ œ ìàAPPEAL€FROM€THE€UNITED€STATES€DISTRICT€COURTˆÐ 8ˆ ÐÓ  ÓFOR€THE€DISTRICT€OF€MASSACHUSETTSÐ ^ ÐÓwÓÌà@èèìà[Hon.€Reginald€C.€Lindsay,€òòU.S.€District€Judgeóó]ˆÐ º  ÐÌßA€') °°` dE<e` AßÐ f¶ ÐÌà@„„'ìàBeforeˆÐ K› ÐÌÓ  Óà@@((ìà€Lynch,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó,Ð ÷G ÐStahl,€òòSenior€Circuit€Judgeóó,Ð Í Ðand€Lipez,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó.Ð £ó  ÐÌÌßA€') °°` dE<$!` AßÐ %!u# ÐÌÓ  Óà  àòòRodney€S.€Dowellóó,€with€whom€òòBerman€&€Dowellóó€was€on€brief,Ð  "Z% Ðfor€appellant.Ð à"0& Ðà  àòòTheodore€B.€Heinrichóó,€Assistant€U.S.€Attorney,€with€whomÐ ¶#' ÐòòMichael€J.€Sullivanóó,€United€States€Attorney,€was€on€brief,€forÐ Œ$Ü( Ðappellee.Ð b%² ) ÐÌÌÔ*‹ƒ'ddd Xdd Xdd X°(#°(#‹ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ+  ÔÐ ä'4#,ä'4# ‹‹ÐÐ SIH(˜#-  "ã@39189„„‰ "ã@‰‹‹SÐÌApril€18,€2007Ð )n$/ ÐÐ RHCô)D%0"  "ã@39189  "ã@ ‹‹RÐÐ(H(˜#1  (ÐÌÙ* ‚!ÙÌÌÐ |-Ì(4? ÐÑ!ÿ Ñâ !âÑ8€ ó© XXdÖdÈ8Ñâ !âÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÓÓÑ€ÑÓ*°,X°` ¨ ƒX°œX*ÓÓ=€/øXÐXdÐd=Óà ` àò òòòóóLYNCH,€òòCircuit€Judgeó óóó.€€Defendant€Edward€Pierre€ran€anÐ ° Ðillegal€wholesale€and€retail€drug€distribution€business€in€FallÐ xÈ ÐRiver,€Massachusetts.€€Ð $t ÐÓ=€/øXÐXdXÐXd=Óà ` àIn€2003,€Pierre€was€convicted€of€possessing€cocaine€withÐ Ð  Ðintent€to€distribute;€the€jury€hung€on€a€separate€drug€conspiracyÐ | Ì Ðcount.€€The€conspiracy€count€was€retried€in€2004,€and€Pierre€wasÐ ( x  Ðconvicted€of€conspiring€to€distribute€crack€cocaine€and€cocaine.€Ð Ô$  ÐPierre's€co„defendant€and€ex„girlfriendò òó ó,€Michelle€Mickens,€pledÐ €Ð  Ðguilty€and€testified€against€Pierre€at€both€trials.€€PierreÐ ,|  Ðsubsequently€was€sentenced€to€a€432-month€term€of€imprisonment€onÐ Ø( Ðthe€conspiracy€charge,€a€240-month€term€of€imprisonment,€which€wasÐ „Ô Ðto€run€concurrently,€on€the€possession€charge,€and€five€years'Ð 0€ Ðsupervised€release.€ò ò€ó óThe€district€court€also€entered€a€final€orderÐ Ü, Ðof€forfeiture€for€$500,000€against€Pierre.ò òó óÐ ¤ô Ðà ` àPierre's€appeal€relates€primarily€to€the€2004€conspiracyÐ P  Ðconviction€and€the€accompanying€sentence,€although€he€does€assignÐ üL Ðerror€to€the€introduction€of€certain€evidence€at€both€the€2003€andÐ ¨ø  Ð2004€trials€and€to€his€sentence€on€the€possession€count.€€He€alsoÐ T!¤" Ðclaims€that€the€district€court's€forfeiture€order€was€error.€€OnÐ #P$ Ðappeal,€we€reject€his€myriad€claims€of€error€and€affirm€hisÐ ¬$ü& Ðconvictions,€his€combined€sentence,€and€the€forfeiture€order.Ð X&¨!( ÐÓ  ÓI.€€FactsÐ (T#* ÐÓ†Óà ` àPierre€and€Mickens€were€indicted€on€August€15,€2002€forÐ °)%, Ðconspiring€to€distribute€cocaine€base.€ò ò€ó óOn€September€24,€2003,€theÐ \+¬&. Ðgrand€jury€returned€a€second€superceding€indictment€charging€PierreÐ ° Ðand€Mickens€with€conspiring€with€others,€from€at€least€April€1998Ð \¬ Ðuntil€September€2001,€to€distribute€fifty€or€more€grams€of€crackÐ X Ðand€500€or€more€grams€of€cocaine,€and€charging€Pierre€withÐ ´  Ðpossessing€with€intent€to€distribute€500€or€more€grams€of€cocaineÐ ` ° Ðon€or€about€July€2,€2000.€ò ò€ó óA€forfeiture€count€sought€criminalÐ  \  Ðforfeiture€of€the€proceeds€of€the€conspiracy,€including€$500,000Ð Ô$  Ðand€five€pieces€of€jewelry.€ò ò€ó óMickens€pled€guilty,€while€Pierre€wentÐ €Ð  Ðto€trial.€ò ò€ó óAfter€a€two„week€trial€in€December€2003,€a€jury€foundÐ H˜  ÐPierre€guilty€of€the€possession€count,€but€found€that€the€quantityÐ ` Ðof€drugs€was€less€than€500€grams.€€The€jury€was€unable€to€reach€aÐ ¼  Ðverdict€on€the€conspiracy€count.€ò ò€ó óThe€conspiracy€count€was€retriedÐ h¸ Ðin€April€and€May€2004,€and€a€jury€found€Pierre€guilty€of€theÐ 0€ Ðconspiracy€count.€ò ò€ó óIn€a€special€verdict€form€as€to€the€forfeitureÐ Ü, Ðallegation,€the€jury€found€that€at€least€$500,000€and€a€pair€ofÐ ¤ô Ðdiamond€earrings€were€proceeds€of€the€drug€conspiracy.ò òó óÐ P  Ðà ` àThe€facts€in€evidence€at€the€2004€conspiracy€trial€fairlyÐ üL  Ðestablish€the€following.Ð ¨!ø" Ðà ` àPierre€ran€a€drug€business€in€Fall€River€from€at€leastÐ T#¤$ ÐApril€1998€to€September€2001.€ò ò€ó óDuring€that€time,€Pierre€obtainedÐ %P & Ðcocaine€from€a€source€in€Brockton.€€He€would€then€cook€some€of€theÐ È&"( Ðcocaine€into€crack,€and€he€would€sell€both€crack€and€powder€cocaineÐ t(Ä#* Ðto€customers€in€Fall€River€and€New€Bedford.€ò ò€ó óPierre€did€not€have€aÐ  *p%, Ðdriver's€license,€so€he€employed€people€to€drive€him€back€and€forthÐ è+8'. Ðto€Brockton€and€around€Fall€River.€ò ò€ó óIn€particular,€MickensÐ ° Ðtestified€at€trial€that€she€chauffeured€Pierre,€in€addition€toÐ xÈ Ðtransporting€drugs,€collecting€money,€and€selling€crack€for€him.€ò òÐ $t Ðó óAt€the€height€of€her€involvement,€Mickens€made€retail€sales€of€upÐ ì < Ðto€$3000€worth€of€crack€òòper€nightóó€at€Fall€River€bars€and€collectedÐ ˜ è Ðat€least€$1000€twice€a€week€from€Pierre's€wholesale€customers.€ò òÐ D ”  Ðó óAmong€Pierre's€biggest€wholesale€customers€were€members€of€the€504Ð ð@  ÐBoyz,€a€gang€that€sold€crack€around€the€Fifth€Street€area€of€FallÐ œì  ÐRiver.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò òó óÐ H˜  Ðà ` àMickens€testified€that€Pierre€used€the€proceeds€of€hisÐ ôD Ðdrug€operation€to€buy€more€drugs,€to€pay€his€living€expenses€andÐ  ð Ðthose€of€Mickens€and€the€mother€of€his€children,€and€to€buy€luxuryÐ Lœ Ðitems€like€expensive€clothes€and€jewelry.€ò ò€ó óIn€addition,€PierreÐ øH Ðobtained€at€least€seven€cars€for€use€in€his€drug€business,€all€ofÐ À Ðwhich€he€registered€to€other€people.€ò ò€ó óMickens's€testimony€wasÐ l¼ Ðâ âcorroborated€by€motel,€bank,€and€motor€vehicle€recordsò òó ó,€and€by€theÐ 4„ Ðtestimony€of€Paula€Costa,€who€bought€crack€from€Pierre,€ò òó óand€FallÐ ° ÐRiver€police€officersò òó ó.Ð \¬ Ðâ âÓ  ÓII.€€Trial€Error€ClaimsÐ X ÐÓµ"Óà ` àPierre€raises€three€claims€of€trial€error€and€argues€thatÐ ´  Ðeach€of€the€errors€entitles€him€to€a€new€trial.€€First,€PierreÐ ` ° Ðargues€that€the€district€court€constructively€amended€theÐ  \  Ðindictment€by€admitting€evidence€of€offenses€not€charged€therein.€ò òÐ ¸  Ðó óNext,€he€argues€that€in€failing€to€suppress€evidence€of€aÐ d´  Ðparticular€drug€seizure,€the€district€court€admitted€evidence€thatÐ `  Ðviolated€Pierre's€Fourth€Amendment€rights€and€that€was€undulyÐ ¼  Ðprejudicial€and€irrelevant.€€Finally,€Pierre€argues€that€theÐ h¸ Ðdistrict€court€impermissibly€admitted€prior€bad€acts€evidence.ò òó óÐ d ÐA.à ` àòòConstructive€Amendment€of€the€IndictmentóóÐ À Ðà ` àAt€both€of€Pierre's€trials,€Mickens€and€several€FallÐ l¼ ÐRiver€police€officers€testified€to€an€incident€on€April€14,€1998€atÐ h Ðthe€Old€Colony€apartment€complex,€where€Pierre€then€resided.€Ð Ä ÐDetective€Michael€Boutin€testified€that€on€that€date€he€discoveredÐ pÀ  Ða€bag€containing€cocaine,€a€scale,€and€a€bottle€of€inositol€(aÐ !l" Ðsubstance€used€to€cut€cocaine€and€crack)€hidden€behind€a€ceilingÐ È"$ Ðpanel€in€the€hallway€of€an€Old€Colony€building.€ò ò€ó óHe€and€otherÐ t$Ä& Ðofficers€seized€the€items€in€the€bag,€replaced€them€with€similar„Ð <&Œ!( Ðlooking€items,€and€returned€the€bag€to€its€hiding€place.€ò ò€ó óÐ è'8#* Ðà ` àThe€police€officers€then€established€surveillance€at€theÐ °)%, Ðsite.€€Officer€Scott€Paul€testified€that€he€saw€Pierre€emerge€fromÐ \+¬&. Ðhis€apartment€with€a€small€step„ladder.€ò ò€ó óOfficer€Alan€BeausolielÐ ° Ðtestified€that€he€saw€Pierre€approach€the€location€of€the€hiddenÐ xÈ Ðitems.€ò ò€ó óAlthough€he€could€hear€the€ladder€and€ceiling€tile€beingÐ $t Ðmoved,€Officer€Beausoliel€did€not€observe€Pierre€remove€the€bagÐ ì < Ðfrom€the€ceiling.€ò ò€ó óOfficer€Paul€observed€Pierre€returning€to€hisÐ ˜ è Ðapartment€with€the€step„ladder.€ò ò€ó óHe€then€heard€a€thud€and€running.€ò òÐ ` °  Ðó óOther€officers€spotted€Pierre€running€out€of€the€building€andÐ (x  Ðfleeing€in€a€car.€ò ò€ó óA€fingerprint€lifted€from€the€bottle€of€inositolÐ Ô$  Ðlater€was€matched€to€Pierre.ò òó óÐ œì  Ðà ` àMickens€corroborated€this€account.€€She€testified€thatÐ H˜ ÐPierre€had€told€her€that€he€had€hidden€cocaine€and€a€scale€in€theÐ ôD Ðceiling€of€the€building,€and€that€when€he€returned€to€retrieve€it,Ð  ð Ðhe€noticed€that€a€switch€had€been€made.€ò ò€ó óWhen€he€heard€a€noise€andÐ Lœ Ðsaw€police,€Pierre€had€run€out€of€the€building€and€fled€in€a€carÐ d Ðdriven€by€an€associate€named€Kennisen.ò òó óÐ À Ðà ` àIn€addition,€Detective€Steven€Washington€testified€thatÐ l¼ Ðwithin€the€two€weeks€before€the€Old€Colony€incident€he€and€twoÐ  h  Ðother€officers€had€observed€Pierre€meeting€with€another€individualÐ Ä!" Ðby€the€name€of€Noel€Lukenson.׃"×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€ò ò€ó óThe€officers€initially€observedÐ p#À$ ÐLukenson€and€Pierre€talking€in€a€car€parked€on€the€street.€ò ò€ó óPierreÐ 8%ˆ & Ðthen€left,€and€after€entering€and€exiting€a€nearby€building,Ð 'P"( ÐLukenson€began€crawling€on€the€ground,€took€up€a€divot€of€grass,Ð ° Ðand€removed€a€large€white€bag€from€underneath€the€divot.€ò òó ó€LukensonÐ \¬ Ðthen€drove€to€Old€Colony,€picked€up€Pierre,€and€drove€to€two€FallÐ X ÐRiver€bars.€ò ò€ó óAt€the€first€bar,€a€person€entered€the€car€and€leftÐ ´  Ðwithin€approximately€two€minutes.€ò ò€ó óAt€the€second€bar,€the€officersÐ | Ì Ðobserved€Pierre€meeting€with€another€man;€the€man€handed€PierreÐ D ”  Ðmoney,€and€Pierre€then€put€his€hand€to€his€mouth,€shook€the€otherÐ ð@  Ðman's€hand,€and€left.ò òó óÐ œì  Ðà ` àPierre€argues€that€these€two€incidents€were€unrelated€toÐ H˜  Ðthe€conspiracy€charged€in€the€indictment,€and€that€by€permittingÐ ôD Ðtestimony€about€them,€the€district€court€constructively€amended€theÐ  ð Ðindictment.€€He€argues€that€the€indictment€charged€only€aÐ Lœ Ðconspiracy€between€Pierre,€Mickens,€and€the€504€Boyz.€ò ò€ó óPierre'sÐ øH Ðposition€is€that€his€supposed€conspiracy€with€Mickens€and€the€504Ð À ÐBoyz€had€nothing€to€do€with€the€Old€Colony€incident€or€with€anyÐ l¼ Ðagreement€he€might€have€had€with€Lukenson.€€Rather,€he€argues,Ð h Ðthese€incidents€were€evidence€of€an€independent,€unchargedÐ Ä  Ðconspiracy.€ò ò€ó óIn€particular,€he€emphasizes€that€Mickens€did€not€knowÐ p!À" ÐLukenson,€and€that€there€was€no€evidence€connecting€the€504€Boyz€toÐ 8#ˆ$ ÐLukenson.€ò ò€ó óHe€argues€that€there€is€a€possibility€that€hisÐ ä$4 & Ðconviction€"rests€upon€an€offense€not€charged€by€the€grand€jury,"Ð ¬&ü!( Ðòòóóand€that€as€a€result€he€is€entitled€to€reversal€of€his€conviction.€ò òó óÐ X(¨#* Ðâ âòòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòDunnóó,€758€F.2d€30,€36€(1st€Cir.€1985).Ð *T%, Ðà ` àThe€government€argues€that€Pierre€has€not€preserved€hisÐ ° Ðâ âconstructive€amendment€claim,€and€that€our€review€is€only€for€plainÐ \¬ Ðerror.€ò ò€ó óòòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòDeCiccoóó,€439€F.3d€36,€44„45€(1st€Cir.Ð X Ð2006).€€We€bypass€the€forfeiture€issue€and€rule€on€the€merits.Ð Ð  Ðà ` àConstructive€amendment€of€an€indictment€is€prohibited€inÐ | Ì Ðorder€"to€preserve€the€right€of€the€person€accused€of€a[]€...Ð ( x  Ðcrime€to€have€a€grand€jury€vote€on€an€indictment,€to€preventÐ Ô$  Ðreprosecution€for€the€same€offense,€and€to€protect€the€right€of€theÐ €Ð  Ðaccused€to€be€informed€of€the€charges."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòVavlitisóó,Ð ,|  Ð9€F.3d€206,€210€(1st€Cir.€1993).€€"A€constructive€amendment€occursÐ Ø( Ðwhen€the€charging€terms€of€the€indictment€are€altered,€eitherÐ „Ô Ðliterally€or€in€effect,€by€prosecution€or€court€after€the€grandÐ 0€ Ðjury€has€last€passed€upon€them."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòFisheróó,€3€F.3dÐ Ü, Ð456,€462€(1st€Cir.€1993)€(quoting€òòDunnóó,€758€F.2d€at€35)€(internalÐ ˆØ Ðquotation€marks€omitted).€€When€the€facts€proved€at€trial€differÐ 4„ Ðfrom€those€alleged€in€the€indictment,€the€indictment€has€beenÐ à0 Ðconstructively€amended.€€òòId.óó€€Constructive€amendment€is€per€seÐ ŒÜ  Ðprejudicial€and€is€grounds€for€reversal€of€a€conviction.€€òòDunnóó,€758Ð 8!ˆ" ÐF.2d€at€35.Ð ä"4$ Ðà ` àThe€second€superceding€indictment€charged€thatÐ $à& ÐÓ ÓÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÓÓ[f]rom€a€time€unknown€to€the€Grand€Jury,€butÐ <&Œ!( Ðat€least€by€in€or€about€April€of€1998,€andÐ 'b") Ðcontinuing€thereafter€until€September€of€2001,Ð è'8#* Ðin€the€District€of€Massachusetts€andÐ ¾($+ Ðelsewhere,€...€PIERRE€...€did€knowinglyÐ ”)ä$, Ðand€intentionally€conspire€and€agree€withÐ j*º%- Ð[Mickens€and]€others€known€and€unknown€to€theÐ @+&. ÐGrand€Jury[]€to€distribute€50€grams€or€more€ofÐ ,f'/ Ða€mixture€or€substance€which€contains€aÐ ° Ðdetectable€amount€of€cocaine€base,€also€knownÐ †Ö Ðas€"crack,"€and€to€distribute€more€than€500Ð \¬ Ðgrams€of€cocaine.ò òÐ 2‚ Ðó óÓø?ÓÓ °ê?ÓÓ °Ü?ÓÓ È?ÓThe€plain€language€of€the€indictment€encompasses€the€Old€ColonyÐ Þ. Ðincident€and€the€activities€with€Lukenson,€which€took€place€inÐ Š Ú ÐApril€1998.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€at€37.€€It€does€not€limit€the€chargedÐ 6 †  Ðconspiracy€to€the€504€Boyz.€€Further,€evidence€of€the€LukensonÐ â 2  Ðincident€was€presented€to€the€Grand€Jury€that€returned€theÐ ŽÞ  Ðindictment.ò òó óÐ :Š  Ðà ` àWe€find€no€support€in€the€record€for€Pierre's€argumentÐ æ6 Ðthat€the€government's€"primary€theory€of€the€case€was€that€PierreÐ ’â Ðand€Mickens€conspired€together€and€with€the€504€Boyz€to€distributeÐ >Ž Ðcocaine,"€ò òó óor€his€contention€that€the€government€switched€theoriesÐ ê: Ðin€the€2004€trial.€ò ò€ó óThe€government€presented€the€Lukenson€evidenceÐ –æ Ðto€the€Grand€Jury€and€the€Old€Colony€evidence€at€the€2003€trialò òó ó.€Ð ^® ÐThe€prosecution€theory€all€along€was€that€Pierre€conspired€withÐ  Z Ðmany€people,€including€Lukenson€and€women€other€than€Mickens.Ð ¶ Ðà ` àNor€did€the€evidence€presented€at€the€2004€trialÐ b ²! Ðnecessarily€show€two€distinct€conspiracies,€as€Pierre€argues.€Ð "^# ÐContrary€to€Pierre's€suggestion,€there€is€no€requirement€that€allÐ º# % Ðof€the€participants€in€a€conspiracy€know€or€even€òòknow€ofóó€oneÐ f%¶ ' Ðanother.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòFentonóó,€367€F.3d€14,€19€(1st€Cir.€2004).€Ð 'b") ÐThe€test€for€determining€whether€a€single€agreement€existed€amongÐ ¾($+ Ðco„conspirators€is€a€pragmatic€one,€taking€into€account€theÐ j*º%- Ðtotality€of€the€circumstances.€€òòId.óóÐ ,f'/ Ðà ` àThe€evidence€at€the€2004€trial€showed€continuity€betweenÐ ° Ðthe€two€time€periods€at€issue€„„€April€1998,€when€the€Lukenson€andÐ \¬ ÐOld€Colony€events€took€place,€and€the€summer€of€1999,€when€MickensÐ X Ðbegan€a€relationship€with€Pierre.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòDavidóó,€940Ð ´  ÐF.2d€722,€734€(1st€Cir.€1991).€€Mickens€testified€that€Pierre€toldÐ ` ° Ðher€about€the€Old€Colony€incident,€and€that€he€told€her€he€fled€inÐ  \  Ða€car€driven€by€a€man€named€Kennisen.€ò ò€ó óShe€testified€that€she€knewÐ ¸  ÐKennisen€because€Pierre€regularly€directed€her€to€collect€moneyÐ €Ð  Ðfrom€him€and€because€she€frequently€drove€Pierre€to€New€Bedford€toÐ ,|  Ðmeet€with€Kennisen.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€ò ò€ó óLikewise,€Mickens€testified€that€when€sheÐ Ø( Ðarrived€in€Fall€River€in€1998,€Pierre€had€an€òòongoingóó€relationshipÐ  ð Ðwith€the€504€Boyz.ò òó óÐ Lœ Ðà ` àThe€evidence€also€showed€that€Pierre's€business€operatedÐ øH Ðin€the€same€way€and€to€the€same€end€in€April€1998€as€it€did€duringÐ ¤ô ÐMickens's€later€involvement.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€€The€Old€Colony€and€LukensonÐ P  Ðevidence€demonstrated€that€in€April€1998€Pierre€used€other€peopleÐ üL Ðto€drive€him€around,€hid€his€drugs€in€public€spaces€and€outdoors,Ð ¨ø  Ðcut€his€drugs€with€inositol,€and€sold€his€drugs€at€Fall€River€bars.€Ð T!¤" ÐMickens's€testimony€was€that€during€the€time€she€was€involved€withÐ #P$ ÐPierre's€business,€he€used€other€people€to€drive€him€around,€oftenÐ ¬$ü& Ðhid€his€drugs€outdoors€in€holes€in€the€ground,€cut€his€drugs€withÐ ° Ðinositol,€and€sold€his€drugs€at€Fall€River€bars.ò òó óÐ \¬ Ðà ` àThe€facts€proved€at€trial€were€more€than€adequate€toÐ X Ðprove€one€ongoing€conspiracy,€with€Pierre€at€the€center.€€òòSeeóóÐ ´  ÐòòFentonóó,€367€F.3d€at€19„20.€€There€was€no€constructive€amendment.€Ð ` ° ÐòòDunnóó,€758€F.2d€at€38;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòKellyóó,€722€F.2dÐ  \  Ð873,€876€(1st€Cir.€1983).Ð ¸  ÐB.à ` àòòDrug€Seizure€EvidenceÐ d´  Ðóóà ` àOn€February€21,€2001,€Pierre€was€driving€in€a€convenienceÐ `  Ðstore€parking€lot€when€he€was€stopped€by€Fall€River€Police€OfficerÐ ¼  ÐDavid€Murphy.€ò ò€ó óOfficer€Murphy€later€testified€that€he€stoppedÐ h¸ ÐPierre€because€he€"was€aware€at€the€time€[that€Pierre]€did€not€haveÐ 0€ Ðan€active€license."€ò ò€ó óAfter€confirming€that€Pierre's€license€hadÐ Ü, Ðbeen€suspended,€Officer€Murphy€arrested€Pierre€for€driving€with€aÐ ¤ô Ðsuspended€license.€ò ò€ó óPierre€was€taken€to€the€Fall€River€PoliceÐ P  ÐDepartment€where€he€was€searched€as€part€of€the€booking€process.€ò òÐ h Ðó óDuring€the€search,€police€officers€recovered€cocaine€from€Pierre'sÐ à0  Ðpocket.ò òó óÐ Œ!Ü" Ðà ` àPierre€filed€a€motion€to€suppress€the€February€21€trafficÐ 8#ˆ$ Ðstop€evidence,€arguing€that€Officer€Murphy€did€not€have€reasonableÐ ä$4 & Ðsuspicion€to€stop€Pierre.€ò ò€ó óThe€district€court€denied€the€motionÐ &à!( Ðafter€an€evidentiary€hearing.€ò ò€ó óThe€court€found€that€Pierre€hadÐ X(¨#* Ðreasonable€suspicion€to€stop€Pierre€for€driving€without€a€license.€ò òÐ  *p%, Ðó óThe€cocaine€seized€during€the€traffic€stop€was€admitted€at€both€theÐ Ì+'. Ð2003€and€2004€trials.€ò ò€ó óPierre€argues€that€the€information€on€whichÐ ° ÐOfficer€Murphy€based€the€traffic€stop€was€stale,€and€thatÐ xÈ Ðintroduction€of€the€seized€cocaine€therefore€violated€his€FourthÐ $t ÐAmendment€rights.Ð Ð  Ðà ` àWe€review€the€district€court's€ultimate€determination€ofÐ | Ì Ðòòóóreasonable€suspicion€on€a€motion€to€suppress€de€novo.€€òòUnitedÐ ( x  ÐStatesóó€v.€òòCapeltonóó,€350€F.3d€231,€240€(1st€Cir.€2003).€€We€reviewÐ Ô$  Ðsubsidiary€factual€findings€for€clear€error.€€òòId.Ð €Ð  Ðà ` àóóA€traffic€stop€constitutes€a€seizure€within€the€meaningÐ ,|  Ðof€the€Fourth€Amendment.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòChhienóó,€266€F.3d€1,€5Ð Ø( Ð(1st€Cir.€2001).€€As€a€result,€"the€stop€must€be€supported€by€aÐ „Ô Ðreasonable€and€articulable€suspicion€of€criminal€activity."€€òòId.óó€Ð 0€ Ðat€6.€€Reasonable€suspicion€requires€more€than€a€naked€hunch€thatÐ Ü, Ðcriminal€activity€is€afoot,€but€less€than€probable€cause.€€òòId.óó€€ItsÐ ˆØ Ðexistence€is€assessed€on€a€case„by„case€basis,€in€light€of€all€theÐ 4„ Ðattendant€circumstances.€€òòId.óó€€When€evaluating€a€claim€ofÐ à0 Ðstaleness,€courts€do€not€measure€the€timeliness€of€informationÐ ŒÜ  Ðsimply€by€counting€the€number€of€days€that€have€elapsed.€€òòUnitedÐ 8!ˆ" ÐStatesóó€v.€òòBucuvalasóó,€970€F.2d€937,€940€(1st€Cir.€1992),€òòabrogatedÐ ä"4$ Ðon€other€grounds€byóó€òòClevelandóó€v.€òòUnited€Statesóó,€531€U.S.€12€(2000).€Ð $à& ÐRather,€a€court€must€assess€the€nature€of€the€information,€theÐ <&Œ!( Ðnature€and€characteristics€of€the€suspected€criminal€activity,€andÐ è'8#* Ðâ âthe€likely€endurance€of€the€information.€€òòCf.óó€òòid.óóÐ ”)ä$, Ðà ` àAt€the€suppression€hearing,€Officer€Murphy€testified€thatÐ ° Ðâ âfrom€September€1999€to€September€2000€he€had€worked€in€the€vice€andÐ \¬ Ðintelligence€unit€of€the€Fall€River€Police€Department.€ò ò€ó óDuring€thatÐ X Ðtime,€Pierre's€name€came€up€often€in€conversation;€fellow€officersÐ Ð  Ðfrequently€discussed€his€drug€dealing,€and€Officer€Murphy€wasÐ | Ì Ðinformed€that€Pierre€did€not€have€an€active€license.€ò ò€ó óOfficerÐ ( x  ÐMurphy€testified€that€after€he€left€the€vice€unit,€he€continued€toÐ ð@  Ðtalk€with€detectives€there€regarding€Pierre,€and€no€one€everÐ œì  Ðinformed€him€that€Pierre's€license€status€had€changed.ò òó ó€Ð H˜  Ðà ` àPierre€relies€on€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòLaughrinóó,€438€F.3d€1245Ð ôD Ð(10th€Cir.€2006),€a€Tenth€Circuit€case,€to€argue€that€OfficerÐ  ð ÐMurphy's€information€(from€the€time€he€served€in€the€vice€unit)€wasÐ Lœ Ðso€old€as€to€be€meaningless,€and€therefore€could€not€justify€aÐ øH Ðtraffic€stop.€ò ò€ó óòòLaughrinóó,€however,€is€distinguishable.€€In€thatÐ ¤ô Ðcase,€a€police€officer€had€stopped€the€defendant€based€on€hisÐ l¼ Ðknowledge,€which€was€at€least€twenty„two€weeks€old,€of€theÐ h Ðdefendant's€driving€record.€€òòId.óó€at€1246„47.€€The€officerÐ Ä  Ðpreviously€had€stopped€the€defendant€when€he€was€driving€on€aÐ p!À" Ðsuspended€license,€but€the€court€noted€that€there€was€no€indicationÐ #l$ Ðfrom€the€officer's€testimony€about€the€length€of€the€licenseÐ È$ & Ðsuspension.€€òòId.óó€òòóóat€1248.€€The€court€stated€that€if€there€had€beenÐ t&Ä!( Ðtestimony€about€the€length€of€the€suspension,€the€court€might€haveÐ  (p#* Ðâ âbeen€able€to€affirm€the€finding€of€reasonable€suspicion.€€òòId.óó€€InÐ Ì)%, Ðthe€absence€of€such€testimony,€however,€it€held€that€the€officer'sÐ ° Ðinformation€was€too€stale€to€justify€the€stop.€€òòId.óóÐ \¬ Ðâ âà ` àHere,€however,€Officer€Murphy€offered€testimonyÐ X Ðindicating€that€Pierre's€license€had€been€suspended€during€theÐ ´  Ðentire€year€that€Officer€Murphy€had€served€in€the€vice€unit.€€ThisÐ ` ° Ðtestimony€suggests€that€Pierre's€license€was€suspended€on€anÐ  \  Ðongoing€basis,€rather€than€for€a€short€period€of€time,€making€theÐ ¸  Ðsuspicion€that€it€was€still€inactive€some€five€months€later€moreÐ d´  Ðreasonable.€€Moreover,€Officer€Murphy€testified€that€he€kept€inÐ `  Ðtouch€with€some€of€the€detectives€in€the€vice€unit,€and€that€noneÐ ¼  Ðof€those€detectives€ever€informed€him€during€conversations€aboutÐ h¸ ÐPierre€of€any€change€in€Pierre's€license€status.€€Although€he€didÐ d Ðnot€explicitly€state€as€much,€the€import€of€Officer€Murphy'sÐ À Ðtestimony€was€that€because€Pierre's€license€status€was€relevant€toÐ l¼ Ðfuture€investigations€and€cases,€he€would€have€expected€someone€toÐ h Ðhave€informed€him€if€Pierre's€license€status€had€changed.€€We€holdÐ Ä Ðthat€Officer€Murphy€had€reasonable€suspicion€to€stop€Pierre's€car,Ð pÀ  Ðand€that€the€district€court€did€not€err€in€failing€to€suppress€theÐ !l" Ðcocaine€seized€incident€to€Pierre's€arrest.Ð È"$ Ðà ` àPierre€cursorily€states€that€the€February€21€evidence€wasÐ t$Ä& Ðirrelevant€and€unduly€prejudicial.€ò ò€ó óòòSeeóó€Fed.€R.€Evid.€403.€€ThisÐ  &p!( Ðargument€has€been€waived,€òòseeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòZanninoóó,€895€F.2d€1,Ð è'8#* Ð17€(1st€Cir.€1990)€("[I]ssues€adverted€to€in€a€perfunctory€manner,Ð ”)ä$, Ðunaccompanied€by€some€effort€at€developed€argumentation,€are€deemedÐ @+&. Ðwaived."),€and€is€without€merit€in€any€event.€€Evidence€that€PierreÐ ° Ðwas€driving€without€a€license€served€to€corroborate€Mickens'sÐ \¬ Ðtestimony€that€Pierre€did€not€have€a€license€and€employed€people€toÐ X Ðdrive€him€around.€€Likewise,€evidence€that€Pierre€was€carryingÐ ´  Ðcocaine€when€he€was€stopped€in€February€2001€is€directly€relevantÐ ` ° Ðto€his€participation€in€a€drug€distribution€conspiracy€betweenÐ  \  ÐApril€1998€and€September€2001.Ð ¸  ÐC.à ` àòòPrior€Bad€Acts€EvidenceóóÐ d´  Ðà ` àPierre€argues€that€the€Old€Colony,€Lukenson,€and€FebruaryÐ `  Ð21€traffic€stop€testimony€should€not€have€been€admitted€because€itÐ ¼  Ðwas€evidence€of€prior€bad€acts.€ò ò€ó óòòSeeóó€Fed.€R.€Evid.€404(b);€òòid.óó€403.€Ð h¸ ÐHe€also€argues€that€during€the€2003€trial,€Officer€Alan€Correiro,Ð 0€ Ðwho€appeared€on€behalf€of€the€government,€testified€about€anÐ Ü, Ðuncharged€shooting€"in€an€attempt€to€prejudice€the€jury€concerningÐ ˆØ Ðthe€character€of€Pierre."€ò ò€ó óThe€district€court's€determination€thatÐ 4„ Ðevidence€is€not€precluded€by€Federal€Rules€of€Evidence€403€orÐ üL Ð404(b)€is€reviewed€for€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð ¨ø  ÐòòFrankhauseróó,€80€F.3d€641,€648€(1st€Cir.€1996).€€ò òó óÐ T!¤" Ðòòóóà ` àOur€conclusion€that€the€Old€Colony,€Lukenson,€andÐ #P$ ÐFebruary€21€traffic€stop€evidence€was€proof€of€the€conspiracyÐ ¬$ü& Ðcharged€in€the€indictment€defeats€the€prior€bad€acts€argument€as€toÐ X&¨!( Ðthat€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòArboledaóó,€929€F.2d€858,€866Ð (T#* Ð(1st€Cir.€1991).€€Moreover,€none€of€this€evidence€was€undulyÐ °)%, Ðprejudicial.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€at€866„67.Ð \+¬&. Ðà ` àAs€to€the€Correiro€testimony,€it€was€a€minor€issue€thatÐ ° Ðwas€fully€remedied€by€the€district€court.€€Correiro€was€called€toÐ \¬ Ðtestify€about€drug„related€statements€that€Pierre€made€to€him€inÐ X ÐOctober€2000.€ò ò€ó óWhen€questioned€about€an€omission€in€his€report,Ð ´  ÐCorreiro€explained€that€the€initial€report€was€not€about€drugsÐ | Ì Ðbecause€the€investigation€was€of€"a€shooting€incident."€ò ò€ó óDefenseÐ ( x  Ðcounsel€objected,€and€the€district€court€instructed€the€jury€toÐ ð@  Ðdisregard€the€answer.€ò ò€ó óDuring€cross„examination,€Correiro€againÐ œì  Ðreferred€to€the€incident€and€stated€that€charges€had€been€broughtÐ d´  Ðagainst€Pierre.€ò ò€ó óDefense€counsel€then€moved€for€a€mistrial,€whichÐ ` Ðthe€district€court€denied,€and€the€court€instructed€the€jury€moreÐ Ø( Ðforcefully€that€the€shooting€incident€had€nothing€to€do€with€theÐ „Ô Ðcase€before€them,€that€the€charges€against€Pierre€had€beenÐ 0€ Ðdismissed,€and€that€they€should€not€think€or€talk€about€theÐ Ü, Ðincident.€ò ò€ó ó"We€normally€presume€that€a€jury€will€follow€anÐ ˆØ Ðinstruction€to€disregard€inadmissible€evidence€inadvertentlyÐ P  Ðpresented€to€it."€€òòGreeróó€v.€òòMilleróó,€483€U.S.€756,€766€n.8€(1987).€Ð üL  ÐOnly€if€there€is€an€overwhelming€probability€that€the€jury€couldÐ ¨!ø" Ðnot€have€followed€the€instruction€and€a€strong€likelihood€that€theÐ T#¤$ Ðevidence€was€devastating€to€the€defendant€will€we€assume€otherwise.€Ð %P & ÐòòId.óó€€This€is€not€such€a€case.Ð ¬&ü!( ÐÓ  ÓIII.€€Forfeiture„Related€ClaimÐ X(¨#* ÐÓ€Óà ` àPierre€argues€that€the€forfeiture€order€was€error€becauseÐ *T%, Ðthe€government€failed€to€demonstrate€that€he€earned€$500,000€as€aÐ °+'. Ðresult€of€the€conspiracy€for€which€he€was€convicted.€ò ò€ó óHe€furtherÐ ° Ðargues€that€the€government€was€improperly€permitted€to€seizeÐ xÈ Ðsubstitute€assets€prior€to€the€2003€trial.Ð $t ÐÌA.à ` àòòSufficiency€of€the€EvidenceóóÐ | Ì Ðà ` àFollowing€the€guilty€verdict€at€the€2004€trial,€the€juryÐ ( x  Ðreturned€a€special€verdict€in€which€it€found€that€at€least€$500,000Ð Ô$  Ðand€a€pair€of€diamond€earrings€seized€by€the€government€wereÐ €Ð  Ð"derived,€directly€or€indirectly,"€from€the€conspiracy.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€ò òó ó€AÐ ,|  Ðforfeiture€verdict€must€be€supported€by€a€preponderance€of€theÐ Ø( Ðevidence.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòKeeneóó,€341€F.3d€78,€86€(1st€Cir.€2003);Ð „Ô ÐòòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòRogersóó,€102€F.3d€641,€648€(1st€Cir.€1996).€€WeÐ 0€ Ðhave€no€problem€finding€a€sufficient€evidentiary€basis€for€theÐ Ü, Ðjury's€verdict€here.Ð ˆØ Ðà ` àThe€evidence€in€support€of€the€forfeiture€verdict€at€theÐ 4„ Ð2004€trial€included€Mickens's€testimony,€as€well€as€several€recordsÐ à0 Ðdocumenting€expenditures€by€Pierre.€€Mickens€testified€that€fromÐ ŒÜ  Ðthe€time€she€moved€to€Fall€River€in€1998€until€she€developed€aÐ 8!ˆ" Ðrelationship€with€Pierre€the€following€year,€she€saw€PierreÐ ä"4$ Ðexchanging€money€with€others€in€various€locations.€€She€furtherÐ $à& Ðtestified€that€during€the€period€of€her€involvement€with€Pierre€„„Ð <&Œ!( Ðfrom€summer€1999€until€her€arrest€in€September€2001€„„€PierreÐ è'8#* Ðadmitted€to€her€that€he€had€been€in€the€drug€business€for€years,Ð ° Ðand€she€observed€Pierre€regularly€obtain€cocaine€from€a€source€inÐ \¬ ÐBrockton€and€sell€crack€to€customers€in€Fall€River€and€New€Bedford.€Ð X ÐMickens€testified€that€she€drove€Pierre€to€his€source€in€BrocktonÐ ´  Ð"[q]uite€a€bit,"€"once€a€week,€twice€a€week,€sometimes€more,"€andÐ ` ° Ðthat€she€drove€Pierre€around€Fall€River€"[j]ust€about€every€day"€soÐ  \  Ðthat€he€could€"collect€money€or€drop€off€ounces."€€She€alsoÐ ¸  Ðtestified€that€she€sold€crack€for€Pierre,€and€at€the€height€of€herÐ d´  Ðinvolvement€she€sold€up€to€$3000€worth€of€crack€per€nightò òó ó;€sheÐ `  Ðfurther€indicated€that€if€Pierre€did€not€need€her€to€drive€himÐ ¼  Ðaround,€she€"was€in€the€bar€[selling€drugs]€from€the€time€theyÐ h¸ Ðopened,€all€day."€€Mickens€also€stated€that€she€collected€at€leastÐ d Ð$1000€two€times€per€week€from€Pierre's€biggest€wholesale€customers,Ð À Ðand€that€Pierre€also€collected€money€from€them.€€Finally,€MickensÐ l¼ Ðtestified€that€she€observed€Pierre€cook€up€part€of€a€half„kilogramÐ h Ðof€cocaine€that€he€had€obtained€in€Florida.ò òó óÐ Ä Ðà ` àThe€documentary€evidence€presented€by€the€governmentÐ pÀ  Ðshowed€that€during€the€course€of€the€conspiracy€Pierre€spent€overÐ !l" Ð$6000€on€motel€rooms,€over€$22,000€on€cars,€and€deposited€andÐ È"$ Ðwithdrew€nearly€$40,000€from€a€bank€account.€€He€also€spent€atÐ t$Ä& Ðleast€$4700€on€jewelry.€€Finally,€he€paid€the€living€expenses€ofÐ  &p!( ÐMickens,€totaling€over€$12,000€per€year,€and€the€expenses€of€hisÐ Ì'#* Ðchildren€and€their€mother.€€Mickens€testified€that€Pierre€had€noÐ x)È$, Ðjob€other€than€drug€dealing.€ò ò€ó óAt€the€time€Mickens€met€Pierre,€heÐ $+t&. Ðdid€have€a€used€car€lot,€but€Mickens€testified€that€he€used€the€carÐ ° Ðlot€to€deal€drugs€and€sold€only€one€or€two€cars€before€getting€ridÐ \¬ Ðof€the€lot€a€couple€of€months€after€she€had€met€him.ò òó óÐ X Ðà ` àAlthough€one€cannot,€based€on€this€testimony€andÐ ´  Ðdocumentary€evidence,€tally€specific€amounts€to€arrive€at€$500,000,Ð ` ° Ðthe€government€may€satisfy€its€burden€of€proof€by€either€direct€orÐ  \  Ðcircumstantial€evidence.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòHoulihanóó,€92€F.3d€1271,Ð ¸  Ð1299€(1st€Cir.€1996).€€From€the€time€of€her€involvement€in€1999,Ð d´  ÐMickens€estimated€that€she€earned€or€collected€between€$3400€andÐ `  Ðover€$20,000€per€week€in€drug€money€for€Pierre.€€The€jury€couldÐ ¼  Ðeasily€have€inferred€from€the€evidence€presented€that€on€averageÐ h¸ ÐPierre€sold€at€least€$3000€worth€of€cocaine€or€crack€each€week€overÐ d Ðthe€life€of€the€conspiracy.€€Such€an€inference€supports€the€jury'sÐ À Ðfinding€that€$500,000€was€forfeitable.Ð l¼ ÐB.à ` àòòSubstitute€AssetsóóÐ h Ðà ` àWhen€Pierre€was€arrested,€the€government€seized€from€himÐ Ä Ðvarious€pieces€of€jewelry€„„€including€a€watch,€necklace,€ring,Ð pÀ  Ðbracelet,€and€earrings€„„€subsequently€valued€at€over€$60,000.€ò ò€ó óItÐ !l" Ðthen€began€administrative€forfeiture€proceedings,€but€when€PierreÐ ä"4$ Ðfiled€a€motion€contesting€the€forfeiture,€ò òó óthe€government€abandonedÐ $à& Ðthe€claim.€ò ò€ó óPierre's€motion€also€requested€immediate€return€of€theÐ <&Œ!( Ðjewelry,€ò òó óbut€the€government€refused€to€return€the€jewelry€toÐ (T#* ÐPierre,€stating€that€it€was€evidence€of€criminal€activity.€ò ò€ó óòòSeeóóÐ °)%, ÐFed.€R.€Crim.€P.€41(g)€(providing€that€the€district€court€"mayÐ x+È&. Ðimpose€reasonable€conditions€to€protect€access€to€[seized]€propertyÐ ° Ðand€its€use€in€later€proceedings").€€The€district€court€agreed€thatÐ \¬ Ðthe€government€was€permitted€to€retain€possession€of€the€jewelry€asÐ X Ðevidence€and€denied€Pierre's€motion€requesting€return€of€theÐ ´  Ðjewelry.ò òó óÐ ` ° Ðà ` àOn€September€24,€2003,€the€government€obtained€a€secondÐ  \  Ðsuperceding€indictment€that€included€a€forfeiture€allegationÐ ¸  Ðspecifying€the€seized€jewelry€and€$500,000€as€forfeitable.€ò ò€ó óAt€theÐ d´  Ð2003€trial,€Fernandes€testified€that€Pierre€had€spent€money€on€goldÐ ,|  Ðchains€and€a€jeweled€bracelet,€and€the€government€offered€theÐ Ø( Ðjewelry€into€evidence€without€objection.€ò ò€ó óPrior€to€the€2004€trial,Ð „Ô Ðhowever,€Pierre€challenged€the€admissibility€of€the€jewelry,Ð Lœ Ðarguing€that€the€government€was€unable€to€tie€it€to€the€allegedÐ øH Ðconspiracy.€ò ò€ó óThe€district€court€granted€Pierre's€motion€to€excludeÐ ¤ô Ðthe€jewelry€from€the€2004€trial,€ò òó óexcept€for€the€pair€of€earrings,Ð l¼ Ðwhich€Mickens€testified€Pierre€purchased€for€himself€during€theirÐ h Ðrelationship.€€Defense€counsel€then€took€possession€of€the€excludedÐ Ä  Ðjewelry.Ð p!À" Ðà ` àAfter€the€jury€in€the€2004€trial€returned€a€specialÐ #l$ Ðverdict€finding€that€$500,000€and€the€earrings€were€forfeitable,Ð È$ & Ðthe€district€court€entered€a€preliminary€order€forfeiting€theÐ t&Ä!( Ðearrings€and€the€other€four€pieces€of€jewelry€as€substitute€assets,Ð  (p#* Ð21€U.S.C.€ðð853(p),€since€the€government€was€unable€to€locate€theÐ Ì)%, Ð$500,000€specified€in€the€special€verdict.€ò ò€ó óòòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð x+È&. ÐòòHallóó,€434€F.3d€42,€58€n.7€(1st€Cir.€2006)€("Substitute€property€mayÐ ° Ðbe€seized€by€the€government€to€satisfy€a€forfeiture€order€where,€byÐ \¬ Ðan€act€or€omission,€the€defendant€has€prevented€the€government€fromÐ X Ðtracing€his€illegally€obtained€assets.").€€Nine€months€later,€theÐ ´  Ðdistrict€court€entered€a€final€order€of€forfeiture,€forfeiting€theÐ ` ° Ðearrings€and€the€substitute€assets.ò òó óÐ  \  Ðà ` àPierre€does€not€object€to€the€forfeiture€of€the€fourÐ ¸  Ðpieces€of€jewelry€as€substitute€assets,€but€rather€to€the€districtÐ d´  Ðcourt's€having€permitted€the€government€to€retain€possession€ofÐ `  Ðthem€prior€to€the€2003€trial.€ò ò€ó óAs€a€remedy,€he€seeks€to€have€theÐ ¼  Ðjewelry€(or€its€monetary€equivalent)€returned€to€him€now.€ò ò€ó óWeÐ „Ô Ðreview€the€district€court's€interpretation€of€Rule€41(g)€de€novo.€Ð Lœ ÐòòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòDeanóó,€100€F.3d€19,€20€(5th€Cir.€1996).€€TheÐ øH Ðdistrict€court's€factual€determination€that€the€jewelry€hadÐ ¤ô Ðevidentiary€value€to€the€government€is€reviewed€for€clear€error.€Ð P  ÐòòSeeóó€òòid.óóÐ üL Ðà ` àRule€41(g)€provides€that€"[a]€person€aggrieved€...€byÐ ¨ø  Ðthe€deprivation€of€property€may€move€[the€district€court]€for€theÐ T!¤" Ðproperty's€return."€€Once€seized€property€is€no€longer€needed€asÐ #P$ Ðevidence,€a€criminal€defendant€is€presumed€to€have€the€right€to€itsÐ ¬$ü& Ðreturn.€€òòSeeóó€òòDeanóó,€100€F.3d€at€20;€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòMillsóó,€991€F.2dÐ X&¨!( Ð609,€612€(9th€Cir.€1993).€€However,€"[a]€Rule€41[(g)]€motion€isÐ (T#* Ðproperly€denied€'if€the€defendant€is€not€entitled€to€lawfulÐ °)%, Ðpossession€of€the€seized€property,€the€property€is€contraband€orÐ \+¬&. Ðsubject€to€forfeiture[,]€or€the€government's€need€for€the€propertyÐ ° Ðas€evidence€continues.'"€€òòMillsóó,€991€F.2d€at€612€(quoting€òòUnitedÐ \¬ ÐStatesóó€v.€òòVan€Cauwenbergheóó,€934€F.2d€1048,€1061€(9th€Cir.€1991));Ð X Ðòòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòSaundersóó,€957€F.2d€1488,€1495€(8th€Cir.Ð ´  Ð1992)€(holding€that€"[t]he€motion€for€the€return€of€the€paperwork,Ð ` ° Ðeven€papers€that€were€not€introduced€at€trial,€was€prematureÐ  \  Ðbecause€defendant's€direct€appeal€was€still€pending");€òòVanÐ ¸  ÐCauwenbergheóó,€934€F.2d€at€1061€(holding€that€a€defendant's€motionÐ d´  Ðfor€the€return€of€property€may€be€denied€based€on€the€government'sÐ `  Ðneed€for€the€property€as€evidence).Ð ¼  Ðà ` àThe€district€court's€finding€that€the€jewelry€hadÐ h¸ Ðevidentiary€value€to€the€government€was€not€clearly€erroneous.€€TheÐ d Ðgovernment€introduced€the€seized€jewelry€into€evidence€at€the€2003Ð À Ðtrial€and€presented€testimony€attempting€to€link€the€jewelry€to€theÐ l¼ Ðproceeds€of€the€charged€conspiracy.€€Once€it€became€clear€that€theÐ h Ðgovernment's€evidence€on€this€point€was€not€particularly€strong,Ð Ä Ðthe€district€court€granted€Pierre's€motion€to€exclude€four€piecesÐ pÀ  Ðof€the€jewelry,€and€defense€counsel€took€possession€of€those€piecesÐ !l" Ðat€that€time.Ð È"$ Ðà ` àMoreover,€even€if€the€district€court's€order€permittingÐ t$Ä& Ðthe€government€to€retain€possession€of€the€jewelry€before€the€2003Ð  &p!( Ðtrial€was€in€error,€Pierre€still€would€not€be€entitled€to€return€ofÐ Ì'#* Ðthe€jewelry€òònowóó.€€An€illegal€seizure€of€property€does€not€immunizeÐ x)È$, Ðit€from€forfeiture€as€long€as€the€government€can€sustain€theÐ $+t&. Ðforfeiture€claim€with€independent€evidence.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð ° ÐòòRogersóó,€102€F.3d€641,€648€(1st€Cir.€1996)€(rejecting€a€claim€thatÐ \¬ Ðproperty€illegally€seized€by€law€enforcement€officers€was€notÐ X Ðforfeitable).€€The€cases€cited€by€Pierre€in€support€of€his€argumentÐ ´  Ðthat€the€jewelry€must€be€returned€do€not€suggest€otherwise.€Ð ` ° ÐRather,€the€remedy€in€each€of€those€cases€was€to€affirm€the€denialÐ  \  Ðof€or€vacate€the€grant€of€a€òòpre„trial€restraining€orderóó€as€toÐ ¸  Ðsubstitute€assets.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòGottióó,€155€F.3d€144,€146,€150Ð d´  Ð(2d€Cir.€1998);€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòFieldóó,€62€F.3d€246,€247„48,€250Ð `  Ð(8th€Cir.€1995);€òòIn€re€Assets€of€Martinóó,€1€F.3d€1351,€1354,€1362Ð ¼  Ð(3d€Cir.€1993);€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòFloydóó,€992€F.2d€498,€498„99€(5thÐ h¸ ÐCir.€1993).Ð d Ðà ` àThe€forfeiture€of€the€jewelry€was€not€erroneous.Ð À ÐÓ  ÓIV.€€Sentencing€Error€ClaimsÐ l¼ ÐÓ  Óà ` àPierre€raises€four€claims€of€sentencing€error.€€He€arguesÐ h Ðthat€the€district€court€improperly€calculated€his€base€offenseÐ Ä Ðlevel€with€respect€to€drug€quantityò ò€ó óand€improperly€applied€a€four„Ð pÀ  Ðlevel€enhancement€for€leadership€of€extensive€criminal€activityò òó ó.€Ð 8!ˆ" ÐHe€also€argues€that€his€sentence€on€the€conspiracy€count€isÐ ä"4$ Ðunreasonable€as€a€matter€of€law€because€of€disparities€withÐ $à& Ðsentences€imposed€on€other€participants€in€the€conspiracy.€ò òÐ <&Œ!( Ðó óFinally,€he€argues€that€his€sentence€on€the€possession€count€isÐ è'8#* Ðunreasonable€because€it€exceeds€the€Guidelines€range€(although€notÐ ”)ä$, Ðthe€statutory€maximum)€for€that€count.ò ò€ó óÐ @+&. Ðà ` àWe€review€de€novo€sentencing€issues€involving€questionsÐ ° Ðof€law.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòMcCarthyóó,€77€F.3d€522,€535€(1st€Cir.Ð \¬ Ð1996).€€ò òó óWe€review€the€district€court's€determination€of€theÐ X Ðreliability€of€sentencing€information€for€abuse€of€discretion.€Ð ´  ÐòòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòLucianoóó,€414€F.3d€174,€180€(1st€Cir.€2005).€Ð ` ° ÐFactual€determinations€are€reviewed€for€clear€error.€€òòId.óóÐ  \  ÐA.à ` àòòDrug€QuantityóóÐ ¸  Ðà ` àAt€sentencing,€the€district€court€found€that€Pierre€wasÐ d´  Ðresponsible€for€1.5€kilograms€or€more€of€cocaine€base,€and€that€theÐ `  Ðappropriate€base€offense€level€therefore€was€38.€ò ò€ó óPierre€arguesÐ ¼  Ðthat€this€finding€was€unsupported€by€either€of€the€jury€verdictsÐ „Ô Ð(one€of€which€found€that€he€did€not,€on€a€particular€occasion,Ð 0€ Ðpossess€500€or€more€grams€of€cocaine€but€rather€possessed€a€lesserÐ Ü, Ðamount,€and€one€of€which€found€that€he€was€responsible€over€theÐ ˆØ Ðcourse€of€the€conspiracy€for€50€grams€or€more€of€crack€and€500Ð 4„ Ðgrams€or€more€of€powder€cocaine),€and€that€it€therefore€infringedÐ à0 Ðon€his€Fifth€Amendment€due€process€and€Sixth€Amendment€jury€trialÐ ŒÜ  Ðrights.ò òó óÐ 8!ˆ" Ðà ` àOur€prior€caselaw€forecloses€any€such€argument.€€òòSeeóóÐ ä"4$ ÐòòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòYeje„Cabreraóó,€430€F.3d€1,€17„18€(1st€Cir.€2005)Ð $à& Ð("Since€òòBookeróó€we€have€made€it€clear€that€the€district€courts€mayÐ <&Œ!( Ðmake€drug€quantity€determinations€for€sentencing€purposesÐ è'8#* Ð....");€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòPrez„Ruizóó,€421€F.3d€11,€14„15€(1stÐ ”)ä$, ÐCir.€2005)€(rejecting€the€claim€that€"the€district€judge€violatedÐ @+&. Ðthe€Sixth€Amendment€by€himself€making€the€determinations€as€to€drugÐ ° Ðquantity€and€other€enhancements").Ð \¬ Ðà ` àTo€the€extent€Pierre€argues€that€there€was€insufficientÐ X Ðevidence€to€support€the€district€court's€drug€quantity€finding,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ´  Ðthe€argument€fails.€€At€Pierre's€first€trial,€in€2003,€FernandesÐ ` ° Ðtestified€that€Pierre€supplied€the€504€Boyz€with€half€a€kilogram€ofÐ  \  Ðcrack€every€month€for€two€years.€ò ò€ó óAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€theÐ ¸  Ðdistrict€court€specifically€commented€on€Fernandes's€credibilityÐ €Ð  Ðand€concluded€that€he€was€"credible€in€[his]€testimony€about€theÐ ,|  Ðdrug€quantity."€ò ò€ó óThis€credibility€determination€was€not€an€abuse€ofÐ Ø( Ðdiscretion,€òòseeóó€òòLucianoóó,€414€F.3d€at€180,€and€Fernandes's€testimonyÐ  ð Ðamply€supports€the€court's€drug€quantity€finding.òòóó€€There€was€thusÐ Lœ Ðno€clear€error€in€the€district€court's€drug€quantity€determination.€Ð øH ÐòòSeeóó€òòid.óóÐ ¤ô ÐB.à ` àòòLeadership€EnhancementóóÐ P  Ðà ` àPierre€makes€similar€objections€to€the€district€court'sÐ üL Ðimposition€of€a€four„level€enhancement€for€leadership€of€extensiveÐ ¨ø  Ðcriminal€activity.€€He€argues€first€that€no€jury€verdictÐ T!¤" Ðestablished€that€he€was€"an€organizer€or€leader€of€a€criminalÐ #P$ Ðactivity€that€involved€five€or€more€participants€or€was€otherwiseÐ ¬$ü& Ðextensive,"€U.S.S.G.€ðð3B1.1(a),€and€that€imposition€of€theÐ X&¨!( Ðenhancement€therefore€was€improper.€ò ò€ó óHe€next€argues€that€theÐ (T#* Ðevidence€was€insufficient€to€establish€that€he€was€a€leader€ofÐ ° Ðextensive€criminal€activity,€even€by€a€preponderance€of€theÐ \¬ Ðevidence.ò òÐ X Ðà ` àó óThere€is€no€requirement€that€the€jury€find€that€theÐ ´  Ðleadership€enhancement€applies.€€"Under€the€advisory€guidelinesÐ ` ° Ðregime,€the€district€court€can€use€the€preponderance€of€theÐ  \  Ðevidence€standard€to€determine€whether€an€enhancement€applies."€Ð ¸  ÐòòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòHollidayóó,€457€F.3d€121,€130€(1st€Cir.€2006).€Ð d´  Ðà ` àWe€review€the€district€court's€"factbound"€determinationÐ `  Ðthat€Pierre€was€a€leader€for€clear€error.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð ¼  ÐòòVenturaóó,€353€F.3d€84,€89€(1st€Cir.€2003).€€The€district€courtÐ h¸ Ðstated€that€it€based€its€determination€that€Pierre€was€a€leader€ofÐ d Ðextensive€criminal€activity€on€"the€number€of€people€involved,€theÐ À Ðnumber€of€places€in€which€drugs€were€sold,€...€the€fact€thatÐ l¼ Ðdrugs€were€sold€both€at€the€wholesale€level€and€at€the€retailÐ h Ðlevel,€...€and€at€the€center€of€all€this€is€Mr.€Pierre."€ò ò€ó óTheÐ Ä Ðdistrict€court€also€mentioned€the€quantity€of€drugs€involved€andÐ ŒÜ  Ðthe€period€of€time€over€which€the€drug€business€extended€as€factorsÐ 8!ˆ" Ðcontributing€to€its€conclusion.€ò ò€ó óThe€record€bears€out€the€districtÐ ä"4$ Ðcourt's€conclusion.€€There€was€testimony€that€a€number€of€differentÐ ¬$ü& Ðpeople€assisted€Pierre€with€his€drug€operations;€that€Pierre€madeÐ X&¨!( Ðwholesale€drug€sales€to€groups€like€the€504€Boyz,€as€well€as€retailÐ (T#* Ðâ âsales€at€bars€in€and€around€Fall€River;€that€Pierre's€businessÐ °)%, Ðinvolved€significant€quantities€of€drugs;€and€that€it€extended€overÐ ° Ða€period€of€at€least€three€years.€€Ð \¬ Ðâ âà ` àThe€district€court's€application€of€the€leadershipÐ X Ðenhancement€thus€was€not€clearly€erroneous.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð ´  ÐòòColð;ðn„Muozóó,€318€F.3d€348,€364€(1st€Cir.€2003)€(noting€that€theÐ ` ° Ðextent€of€criminal€activity€within€the€meaning€of€U.S.S.G.€ðð3B1.1Ð  \  Ðis€assessed€based€on€"the€totality€of€the€circumstances,€includingÐ ¸  Ðnot€only€the€number€of€participants€but€also€the€width,€breadth,Ð d´  Ðscope,€complexity,€and€duration€of€the€scheme"€(quoting€òòUnitedÐ `  ÐStatesóó€v.€òòDietzóó,€950€F.2d€50,€53€(1st€Cir.€1991))€(internalÐ ¼  Ðquotation€marks€omitted)).Ð h¸ ÐC.à ` àòòReasonablenessóóÐ d Ðà ` àPierre€argues€that€his€432„month€sentence€on€theÐ À Ðconspiracy€count€is€unreasonable€as€a€matter€of€law.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSeeóó€òòUnitedÐ l¼ ÐStatesóó€v.€òòJimnez„Beltreóó,€440€F.3d€514,€519€(1st€Cir.€2006)€(enÐ h Ðbanc),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€127€S.€Ct.€928€(2007);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€18€U.S.C.Ð Ä Ððð3553(a).€€He€bases€this€argument€on€the€fact€that€his€sentence€isÐ pÀ  Ðover€three€times€as€long€as€that€imposed€on€any€other€member€of€theÐ !l" Ðconspiracy.€ò ò€ó óHe€makes€a€related€argument€that€the€district€courtÐ È"$ Ðfailed€to€explain€adequately€the€reasons€why€his€sentence€is€soÐ $à& Ðâ âmuch€longer€than€his€co„conspirators'€sentences.Ð <&Œ!( Ðà ` àPierre€fails€to€present€us€with€any€evidence€that€he€isÐ ° Ðâ âsimilarly€situated€to€other€members€of€the€conspiracy€and€soÐ \¬ Ðtherefore€arguably€should€have€received€a€comparable€sentence.€€OurÐ X Ðreview€of€the€evidence€indicates€quite€the€contrary€„„€that€PierreÐ ´  Ðwas€not€similarly€situated€to€other€members€of€the€conspiracy.€€ForÐ ` ° Ðexample,€Pierre€is€not€similarly€situated€to€Mickens,€who€reportedÐ  \  Ðto€and€took€orders€from€Pierre.€€Mickens€testified€that€Pierre€beatÐ ¸  Ðher€on€a€number€of€occasions,€that€he€threatened€to€kill€her,€andÐ d´  Ðthat€he€forced€her€to€have€sex€with€other€men€while€he€watched.€ò òÐ `  Ðó óLikewise,€Pierre's€criminal€history€included€incidents€thatÐ ¼  Ðdistinguished€him€from€his€co„conspirators.€€Pierre's€pre„sentenceÐ h¸ Ðreport,€which€included€information€from€the€grand€juryÐ d Ðinvestigation€that€had€been€excluded€at€trial,€stated€that€PierreÐ À Ðpreviously€had€been€convicted€of€threatening€to€kill€a€formerÐ l¼ Ðgirlfriend€and€"cut€up€her€face€and€dump€her€body."€ò ò€ó óMoreover,€bothÐ h ÐMickens€and€Fernandes€pled€guilty€and€provided€substantialÐ à0 Ðassistance€to€the€government.€ò ò€ó óA€defendant's€sentence€is€notÐ ŒÜ  Ð"unreasonable€simply€because€his€co„defendants€agreed€to€help€theÐ T!¤" Ðgovernment€in€exchange€for€reduced€sentences."€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð #P$ ÐòòVzquez„Riveraóó,€470€F.3d€443,€449€(1st€Cir.€2006);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòUnitedÐ ¬$ü& ÐStatesóó€v.€òòSaezóó,€444€F.3d€15,€18€(1st€Cir.€2006),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€127Ð X&¨!( Ðâ âS.€Ct.€224€(2006).€€Finally,€all€of€the€participants€in€theÐ (T#* Ðconspiracy€except€for€Mickens€were€sentenced€by€a€different€judgeÐ ° Ðfrom€the€one€who€sentenced€Pierre.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€ò ò€ó óòòSeeóó€òòSaezóó,€444€F.3d€at€19.Ð \¬ Ðâ âà ` àThe€district€court€explained€its€reasons€for€imposing€theÐ $t Ðsentence€that€it€did.€€The€court€repeatedly€expressedÐ Ð  Ðdisappointment€that€Pierre,€in€his€statement€to€the€court,€refusedÐ | Ì Ðto€take€any€responsibility€for€the€situation€in€which€he€foundÐ ( x  Ðhimself€and€failed€to€express€any€remorse€for€his€actions.€ò ò€ó óIn€itsÐ Ô$  ÐStatement€of€Reasons,€the€court€wrote€that€it€viewed€Pierre€as€"anÐ œì  Ðunrepentant€and€dangerous€dealer€in€illicit€drugs€and€firearms."€ò òÐ H˜  Ðó óIt€explained€that€it€found€a€sentence€of€432€months€"sufficient€toÐ ` Ðpunish€[Pierre]€and€€to€deter€him€and€others€from€similar€conduct,"Ð ¼  Ðwhile€still€preserving€the€possibility€that€Pierre€would€"have€someÐ h¸ Ðperiod€of€freedom€in€the€sunset€of€his€life."ò òó óÐ d Ðà ` àAlthough€the€district€court€did€not€explicitly€state€whyÐ À Ðit€imposed€on€Pierre€a€sentence€much€more€substantial€than€thoseÐ l¼ Ðreceived€by€other€members€of€the€conspiracy,€we€can€infer€itsÐ h Ðreasoning€"by€comparing€what€was€argued€by€the€parties€...€withÐ Ä  Ðwhat€the€[court]€did."€€òòJimnez„Beltreóó,€440€F.3d€at€519.€€PierreÐ p!À" Ðargued€in€his€sentencing€memorandum€and€at€his€sentencing€hearingÐ #l$ Ðthat€he€should€receive€a€sentence€no€greater€than€that€imposed€onÐ È$ & Ðhis€co„conspirators.€ò ò€ó óThe€district€court€rejected€this€argumentÐ ° Ðand,€having€found€that€Pierre€was€a€dangerous€and€unrepentantÐ xÈ Ðcriminal,€sentenced€Pierre€within€the€Guidelines€range.Ð $t Ðà ` àPierre's€sentence€on€the€conspiracy€count€is€reasonableÐ Ð  Ðand€is€adequately€explained.€€òòSeeóó€òòSaezóó,€444€F.3d€at€17.Ð | Ì ÐD.à ` àòòSentence€on€Possession€CountóóÐ ( x  Ðà ` àBecause€Pierre€was€sentenced€to€serve€concurrentÐ Ô$  Ðsentences,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€he€was€not€prejudiced€by€any€error€he€alleges€withÐ €Ð  Ðrespect€to€the€possession€count.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòZiskindóó,€471Ð ,|  ÐF.3d€266,€271€(1st€Cir.€2006);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòDominguezÐ Ø( ÐBenitezóó,€542€U.S.€74,€81„82€(2004)€("[R]elief€for€error€is€tied€inÐ „Ô Ðsome€way€to€prejudicial€effect€...€[and€requires€a]€showing€of€'aÐ 0€ Ðreasonable€probability€that,€but€for€[the€error€claimed],€theÐ Ü, Ðresult€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.'"€€(thirdÐ ˆØ Ðalteration€in€original)€(quoting€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòBagleyóó,€473€U.S.Ð 4„ Ð667,€682€(1985)€(opinion€of€Blackmun,€J.))).€€His€240„monthÐ à0 Ðsentence€on€the€possession€count€runs€concurrently€with€his€432„Ð ŒÜ  Ðâ âmonth€sentence€on€the€conspiracy€count.Ð 8!ˆ" Ðà ` àPierre's€convictions,€his€combined€sentence,€and€theÐ ° Ðâ âforfeiture€order€entered€against€him€are€òòaffirmedóó.