## Facts

- San Juan police observed Raymond Fuentes-Echevarria driving in reverse in the middle of a street near a known drug-trafficking area.
- During a traffic stop, a narcotics-detection dog alerted to two locations on the vehicle; Fuentes fled and was not arrested at the scene.
- Police secured the vehicle, obtained a warrant, and found a hidden compartment near the dashboard containing a .40 Glock pistol modified to fire automatically, multiple magazines, and 108 rounds of ammunition.
- Fuentes was indicted in the District of Puerto Rico for illegal possession of a machine gun under 18 U.S.C. § 922(o).
- He entered an open guilty plea.
- The PSR calculated an advisory Guidelines range of 21–27 months, including a two-level acceptance-of-responsibility reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a), but not the additional one-level reduction under § 3E1.1(b) because the government did not move for it.
- The government sought 60 months; the district court imposed 48 months’ imprisonment and 36 months’ supervised release, varying upward based on the weapon, concealment, flight, public safety, and general deterrence in light of local gun-violence and drug conditions.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court committed procedural error by not granting, on its own initiative, the additional one-level acceptance-of-responsibility reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b) absent a government motion.
2. Whether the 48-month upward variance was procedurally or substantively unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including whether the court overemphasized general deterrence and local crime conditions.
3. Whether an ineffective assistance of counsel claim could be decided on direct appeal on the existing record.

## Decision

- The First Circuit affirmed the sentence.
- The court held the district court did not err in declining to apply § 3E1.1(b) without a government motion.
- The court held the upward variance to 48 months was procedurally and substantively reasonable given the explained § 3553(a) considerations.
- The court dismissed the ineffective assistance claim without prejudice to collateral review because the record was insufficiently developed.

## Legal Principles

- The additional one-level reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b) is available only upon a government motion; a sentencing court need not, and generally cannot, award it sua sponte.
- Sentences are reviewed for abuse of discretion, assessing both procedural error (including adequate explanation and proper consideration of § 3553(a)) and substantive reasonableness.
- A district court may vary upward based on offense-specific aggravating facts and the need for general deterrence, including community conditions, so long as the court also considers the defendant’s individual circumstances and explains why the case warrants a variance.
- Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are ordinarily not resolved on direct appeal unless the record conclusively establishes deficiency and prejudice; they are typically addressed in collateral proceedings (e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 2255).

## Conclusion

The First Circuit upheld an above-Guidelines sentence for unlawful machine-gun possession, ruling that the extra acceptance-of-responsibility level under § 3E1.1(b) required a government motion and that the district court permissibly relied on offense aggravators and general deterrence (alongside individualized factors) to justify the upward variance, while leaving any ineffective-assistance claim for collateral review.


United States v. Fuentes-Echevarria, 856 F.3d 22 (1st Cir. 2017)