United States v. Marlon Marcus Harding

34 F.3d 1074 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Marlon Marcus HARDING, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10761. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 23, 1994. * Decided Aug. 26, 1994. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HUG and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Marlon Marcus Harding appeals the district court's denial of his request for a downward departure from the applicable sentencing guideline range for his violations of 18 U.S.C. Secs. 924 (c), 2113(a), (d), 2312, and 2313. He argues that the district court improperly concluded that it lacked authority under the guidelines to depart downward on the basis that Harding was mentally retarded, lacked sophistication and was a follower. Harding bases his argument on the district judge's following statements: 3 I think the argument which is made by [Harding's counsel] is a strong argument, but what it does is weigh in favor at a minimum…