2013 3b1_1

CHAPTER THREE - ADJUSTMENTS


PART B - ROLE IN THE OFFENSE


Introductory Commentary

This Part provides adjustments to the offense level based upon the role the defendant played in committing the offense.  The determination of a defendant's role in the offense is to be made on the basis of all conduct within the scope of §1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct), i.e., all conduct included under §1B1.3(a)(1)-(4), and not solely on the basis of elements and acts cited in the count of conviction.

When an offense is committed by more than one participant, §3B1.1 or §3B1.2 (or neither) may apply.  Section 3B1.3 may apply to offenses committed by any number of participants.

Historical Note:  Effective November 1, 1987.  Amended effective November 1, 1990 (see Appendix C, amendment 345); November 1, 1992 (see Appendix C, amendment 456).


§3B1.1.     Aggravating Role

Based on the defendant's role in the offense, increase the offense level as follows:

(a)       If the defendant was an organizer or leader of a criminal activity that involved five or more participants or was otherwise extensive, increase by 4 levels.

(b)      If the defendant was a manager or supervisor (but not an organizer or leader) and the criminal activity involved five or more participants or was otherwise extensive, increase by 3 levels.

(c)       If the defendant was an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor in any criminal activity other than described in (a) or (b), increase by 2 levels.


Commentary

Application Notes:

1.      A "participant" is a person who is criminally responsible for the commission of the offense, but need not have been convicted.  A person who is not criminally responsible for the commission of the offense (e.g., an undercover law enforcement officer) is not a participant.

2.      To qualify for an adjustment under this section, the defendant must have been the organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor of one or more other participants.  An upward departure may be warranted, however, in the case of a defendant who did not organize, lead, manage, or supervise another participant, but who nevertheless exercised management responsibility over the property, assets, or activities of a criminal organization.

3.      In assessing whether an organization is "otherwise extensive," all persons involved during the course of the entire offense are to be considered.  Thus, a fraud that involved only three participants but used the unknowing services of many outsiders could be considered extensive.

4.      In distinguishing a leadership and organizational role from one of mere management or supervision, titles such as "kingpin" or "boss" are not controlling.  Factors the court should consider include the exercise of decision making authority, the nature of participation in the commission of the offense, the recruitment of accomplices, the claimed right to a larger share of the fruits of the crime, the degree of participation in planning or organizing the offense, the nature and scope of the illegal activity, and the degree of control and authority exercised over others.  There can, of course, be more than one person who qualifies as a leader or organizer of a criminal association or conspiracy.   This adjustment does not apply to a defendant who merely suggests committing the offense. 

Background:  This section provides a range of adjustments to increase the offense level based upon the size of a criminal organization (i.e., the number of participants in the offense) and the degree to which the defendant was responsible for committing the offense.  This adjustment is included primarily because of concerns about relative responsibility.  However, it is also likely that persons who exercise a supervisory or managerial role in the commission of an offense tend to profit more from it and present a greater danger to the public and/or are more likely to recidivate.  The Commission's intent is that this adjustment should increase with both the size of the organization and the degree of the defendant's responsibility.

In relatively small criminal enterprises that are not otherwise to be considered as extensive in scope or in planning or preparation, the distinction between organization and leadership, and that of management or supervision, is of less significance than in larger enterprises that tend to have clearly delineated divisions of responsibility.  This is reflected in the inclusiveness of §3B1.1(c).

Historical Note:  Effective November 1, 1987.  Amended effective November 1, 1991 (see Appendix C, amendment 414); November 1, 1993 (see Appendix C, amendment 500).