United States v. James Michael Brown

Good Law
93 Daily Journal DAR 1919·985 F.2d 478·1993 WL 29060·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 2014·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1009
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 10, 199392-50247California1,822 words

Opinion

Opinion

Canby, J.

Defendant-appellant James Michael Brown challenges the district court’s refusal, in sentencing him following his convic tion on three counts of bank robbery, to depart downward from the applicable guideline range. Because we conclude that the district court acted under the erroneous impression that it lacked authority to depart, we vacate Brown’s sentence and remand his case for resentencing.

BACKGROUND

Brown pleaded guilty to three counts of unarmed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). His six prior felony convictions placed him in the “career offender” criminal history category of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, subject to a sentencing range of 168 to 200 months in prison.

Brown asked the court to depart downward from the guideline range, asserting three grounds in support of departure:

The district court refused to depart downward. At the sentencing hearing the court stated:

At other points in the hearing the court indicated that it lacked discretion to depart downward on each of the grounds Brown asserted. The court sentenced Brown to 168 months in prison.

Brown maintains that the district court erred in concluding that it was without authority to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.