Limitation on Role Enhancement Under U.S.S.G. §3B1.1(c): Buyer-Seller Relationship Insufficient

Introduction

This commentary examines the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in United States v. Ivan Emilio Echavarria, 24-11600 (11th Cir. May 21, 2025), which vacated and remanded a 240-month sentence for distribution of fentanyl. The defendant, Ivan Emilio Echavarria, pled guilty to three counts of distributing fentanyl, resulting in a PSI-calculated guidelines range of 180–188 months after a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c). He challenged the enhancement on appeal, arguing that his interactions with a confidential informant amounted only to a buyer-seller relationship, insufficient to support the organizer/manager enhancement. The government conceded error, and the Court of Appeals agreed, establishing a clear rule that a mere buyer-seller relationship—even where price negotiation and advice on cutting fentanyl occur—does not satisfy the § 3B1.1(c) managerial role criteria.

Summary of the Judgment

The Eleventh Circuit vacated Echavarria’s sentence and remanded for resentencing. The court held that the district court erred in applying the two-level enhancement for an aggravating role under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c). The enhancement requires evidence of decision-making authority, recruitment of accomplices, control or supervision of others, or entitlement to a larger share of criminal proceeds. The record contained only evidence of sales to a single buyer, price setting, and advice on diluting fentanyl. Those facts reflect a buyer-seller dynamic, which our precedents explicitly reject as a basis for the § 3B1.1(c) enhancement.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

United States v. Phillips, 287 F.3d 1053 (11th Cir. 2002): Lists factors relevant to § 3B1.1(c), including decision-making authority and recruitment of accomplices.
United States v. Jiminez, 224 F.3d 1243 (11th Cir. 2000): Clarifies that control or influence over even one participant may suffice for enhancement.
United States v. Glinton, 154 F.3d 1245 (11th Cir. 1998): Holds that a mere buyer-seller relationship is insufficient for § 3B1.1(c).
United States v. Alred, 144 F.3d 1405 (11th Cir. 1998): Reinforces that middleman or distributor status does not automatically trigger a managerial enhancement.
United States v. Witek, 61 F.3d 819 (11th Cir. 1995): Notes that routine negotiations between buyers and sellers are incidental to the commercial relationship and do not demonstrate supervisory control.

Legal Reasoning

The Court addressed two primary questions: (1) whether the government met its burden by a preponderance of the evidence to support the aggravating role enhancement, and (2) whether the facts—an undercover sale, price negotiations, and advisories on cutting fentanyl—demonstrated managerial control. Relying on Phillips and its progeny, the Court held that § 3B1.1(c) enhancement demands more than transactional interactions. The guideline commentary enumerates factors such as recruitment, decision-making authority, control over accomplices, and entitlement to a larger share of illicit proceeds. Echavarria’s conduct amounted only to setting wholesale prices and advising buyers on dosage reduction to avoid overdoses—activity our precedents classify as inherent in a buyer-seller relationship rather than evidence of a supervisory role.

Impact

This decision curbs overbroad application of § 3B1.1(c) in drug trafficking cases. Prosecutors must now present evidence that defendants exercised genuine managerial or supervisory authority over participants, rather than relying on evidence of price setting or usage instructions. District courts must carefully distinguish between commercial interactions and control-based conduct. This ruling will inform future sentencing hearings and guide probation officers in drafting PSIs, ensuring role enhancements are reserved for defendants who actually organize, direct, or control criminal enterprises.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Role Enhancement (§ 3B1.1(c)): A two-level increase in offense level when a defendant is shown to be an “organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor” in a criminal activity.
Preponderance of the Evidence: The standard requiring that the government’s evidence be more convincing than the defendant’s contrary evidence.
Buyer-Seller Relationship: A transaction where one party sells goods (here, fentanyl) and sets terms of sale, without exercising broader organizational control or authority over the buyer’s subsequent actions.
Sentencing Guidelines Range: The court-calculated imprisonment range based on offense level and criminal history category, serving as the starting point for the sentencing court.

Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit’s decision in United States v. Echavarria clarifies that advice on drug potency or dilution and unilateral price setting do not constitute the requisite control to apply the § 3B1.1(c) role enhancement. This ruling underscores the necessity of concrete evidence of supervisory authority—such as recruiting participants, directing their activities, or controlling the enterprise’s proceeds—before imposing an aggravated role enhancement. The judgment refines the application of the Sentencing Guidelines, promotes uniformity in enforcement, and safeguards defendants from unwarranted sentence increases based solely on routine buyer-seller interactions.