Drug-to-Cash Conversion
Zaira Valenzuela Lujan pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine. During the investigation police seized $10,694. The district court converted the cash into a quantity of methamphetamine as part of Lujan’s advisory sentencing range.
Lujan appealed, arguing the court erred by using the “wholesale” rate rather than the “retail” rate when it performed the cash-to-drug conversion. The Fifth Circuit reversed, holding the district court erred in its drug-quantity conversion because it implausibly found Lujan would have used the entire amount of $10,694 to buy more methamphetamine.
The PSR had concluded, according to the case agent, “10,694 can purchase 1,600 grams of actual methamphetamine.” Based in part on that drug-quantity attribution, the probation officer calculated an advisory range of 168 to 210 months of imprisonment.
Lujan objected to the cash-to-drug conversion on several grounds. First, she argued the PSR improperly used the “wholesale” price of methamphetamine, rather than “the going price of methamphetamine . . . to the average user,” i.e., the retail price. This calculation would have resulted in an advisory range of 108 to 135 months. The district court overruled her objections, and sentenced her to 168 months’ imprisonment.
The Fifth Circuit said the district court had treated the $10,694 as money that she intended to use for future drug purchases. In other words, the district court assumed she would have used all of her illicit profits to purchase more methamphetamine. That assumption, the Court said, was purely speculative. It said it was inescapable that some of the proceeds of their drug business would have been devoted to living expenses, such as housing, food, and medical needs. “There is nothing in the PSR, or elsewhere in the record, that would enable the district court to determine which portion of the $10,694 would go to repurchase drugs, and which portion would go to other costs, including living expenses.” Thus, the district court erred by treating the entire amount as money Lujan would have used to purchase more methamphetamine.