United States v. Steven Scott

8 F.3d 33 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Steven SCOTT, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-30103. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 5, 1993. * Decided Oct. 20, 1993. 1 Before: CHOY, GOODWIN, and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Steven Scott contends that he should be resentenced because the district court erroneously concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to depart from the sentencing guidelines on the basis of Scott's youthful lack of guidance. The record does not support Scott's contention, and we accordingly dismiss his appeal. 4 We review de novo a district court's legal determination that the guidelines do not allow departure. United States v. Belden, 957 F.2d 671, 676 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 234 (1992). If the record indicates, however, that the district court exercised its discretion in refusing to depart from the guidelines, that decision is not reviewable.…