USA v. Julio Antonio Trejo, Jr.

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 15-11084
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cr-20835-FAM-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JULIO ANTONIO TREJO, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(November 23, 2015)
Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Julio Antonio Trejo Jr. appeals his sentence of 36 months of imprisonment
imposed following his plea of guilty to witness tampering. 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1).
Case: 15-11084 Date Filed: 11/23/2015 Page: 1 of 4

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Trejo challenges the eight-level enhancement of his sentence for threatening to
inflict injury on a person to obstruct justice. See United States Sentencing
Guidelines Manual § 2J1.2(b)(1)(B) (Nov. 2014). We affirm.
The district court enhanced Trejo’s sentence based on his factual proffer that
he twice posted on Instagram personal information about and “threats” to an
informant scheduled to testify against Trejo’s friend, Oscar Diaz. Trejo, who had
been Diaz’s friend since childhood and lent him a vehicle that he used to transport
illegal drugs, knew Diaz was facing a trial at which the informant would be a
witness. Trejo posted on his Instagram account, “MIAMIHEAT_BULLIES,” a
photograph and the home address of the informant, a description and license
number of his vehicle, and comments that identified him as a “snitch” and that
warned of “consequences.” The information was directed to the informant’s
Instagram account and to followers of Trejo’s account. Trejo also posted “similar
threats to the [informant]” on a second Instagram account named
“snitch_killa305.” Two days later, federal agents interviewed Trejo, instructed him
to cease any involvement in the Diaz investigation, and warned him that he would
be questioned if any witness in the investigation was threatened or harmed. The
next day, Trejo reposted on his Instagram account the same material about the
informant and a “[shout out] to agent Adam and Agent Mila, I don’t do anything
illegal so f*** you and your investigation.” Agents arrested Trejo, who admitted
Case: 15-11084 Date Filed: 11/23/2015 Page: 2 of 4

-- 2 of 4 --

3
that he posted personal information about the informant and that he intended to
smash the window of the informant’s vehicle. Trejo agreed to contact an associate,
and during a telephone call recorded by federal agents, Trejo and the associate
discussed a prior effort to assault the informant. Later, Trejo’s employer notified
agents that he had found a 5.7 caliber pistol in Trejo’s lunch bag.
The district court did not clearly err in finding that Trejo threatened the
informant to dissuade him from assisting in Diaz’s prosecution. A defendant is
subject to an eight-level increase of his base offense level if his “offense involved
causing or threatening to cause physical injury to a person, or property damage, in
order to obstruct the administration of justice.” U.S.S.G. § 2J1.2(b)(1)(B). In the
light of Trejo’s admissions, the district court reasonably interpreted two comments
Trejo posted that, “If you see this guy you already know what time it is,” and
“People think they can snitch on people and the[re] won’t be any consequences,”
as threatening that the informant was “going to get beaten up or something [would]
happen to [him].” The district court also reasonably perceived as “threatening” the
names of Trejo’s Instagram account, “MIAMIHEAT_BULLIES,” and the second
account that he used, “snitch_killa305.” And the district court was entitled to find
that Trejo intended to coerce the informant to cease cooperating with authorities
because Trejo posted the comments while aware that the informant was scheduled
to testify at Diaz’s trial; Trejo flaunted a willingness to defy the law by making an
Case: 15-11084 Date Filed: 11/23/2015 Page: 3 of 4

-- 3 of 4 --

4
audacious comment to investigating agents; and Trejo admitted at sentencing that
“his actions were intended to intimidate the informant.” The evidence supports the
decision to apply the eight-level increase to Trejo’s base offense level.
We AFFIRM Trejo’s sentence.
Case: 15-11084 Date Filed: 11/23/2015 Page: 4 of 4

-- 4 of 4 --