United States v. Douglas Wayne Hoskinson

78 F.3d 595 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Douglas Wayne HOSKINSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50658. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 8, 1996. * Decided March 12, 1996. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, BROWNING and FARRIS, Circuit Judges. MEMORANDUM 1 Hoskinson appeals from his sentence following a guilty plea to six counts of mailing threatening communications in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876 . The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm. 2 We review departures from the Sentencing Guidelines under the three-part test established in United States v. Lira-Barraza, 941 F.2d 745, 746-47 (9th Cir.1991) (en banc) (Lira-Barraza ). First, we must determine whether the trial court had the legal authority to depart. A district court may…