United States v. Tanya Eckroat

facts for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Diaz, 884 F.3d 911, 914 (9th Cir.

2018). Contrary to Eckroat’s claim, the record reflects that the court considered

each of the factors listed in the commentary to the minor-role Guideline. See

U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(C). Moreover, it properly compared Eckroat to her

alleged recruiter, the only other person she identified in the criminal activity, as

well as to other likely participants. See Diaz, 884 F.3d at 916-17. The court

concluded that, although Eckroat may have been less culpable than her recruiter,

she was not “substantially less culpable than the average participant,” U.S.S.G.

§ 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A), in light of her admitted history of smuggling and relative

sophistication. On this record, the court did not abuse its discretion by denying the

minor-role reduction.

Eckroat also contends that the court relied on the clearly erroneous fact that

she was on supervised release at the time of the offense. We conclude any error

was harmless because the record demonstrates the court’s concern was not that she

was on supervision, but rather that Eckroat had a recent conviction for smuggling

an alien. See United…