United States v. Patino, No. 17-3199 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of three counts relating to a conspiracy to distribute human growth hormone (HGH) for unauthorized purposes and to smuggle HGH into the United States. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to admit evidence of a 1998 conviction at trial and defendant's 40 month sentence. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the 1998 conviction because it was used to prove intent and knowledge and was well supported by evidence; by applying a sophisticated means enhancement under USSG 2T3.1(b)(1); and by imposing a sentence above the advisory guidelines range and sufficiently explaining why defendant's understated criminal history justified an upward departure to 40 months.
Court Description: Gruender, Author, with Colloton and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. In this prosecution for distribution of human growth hormone and smuggling, the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence that defendant had been convicted in 1998 for possession of the drug with intent to distribute, as well as certain statements he made at that time, as the evidence was relevant to intent and knowledge and was not overly remote in time in light of the fact that the two crimes were extremely similar; no error in applying a sophisticated means enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 2T3.1(b)(1) based on the evidence at trial and the unobjected-to facts in the PSR; the district court did not err in departing upward based on defendant's understated criminal history, where defendant had five unscored prior convictions, including two for international drug distribution.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.