United States v. Dean Harvey Hicks

28 F.3d 109 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Dean Harvey HICKS, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 93-50644, 93-50645. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 13, 1994. * Decided June 27, 1994. Before: HUG, SKOPIL, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 We remanded this matter to the district court with instructions that it articulate reasons for the extent of its departure from the Sentencing Guidelines. United States v. Hicks, 997 F.2d 594, 599 (9th Cir.1993). In our prior decision, we upheld the basis for the court's departure and affirmed its findings of fact in support of its decision to depart upward from the guideline range. Id. at 598-99 (applying three-part test established by United States v. Lira-Barraza, 941 F.2d 745, 746-47 (9th Cir.1991 (en banc)). Although Hicks again challenges the basis for departure and the court's underlying factual findings, we will not again review…