Rascon-Rascon

MEMORANDUM **

The Government appeals the district court’s decision to depart from the Sentencing Guidelines based on “extraordinary socio-economic conditions” and “family responsibilities.” We vacate and remand for resentencing.

DISCUSSION

1. Socio-Economic Conditions

The Sentencing Guidelines prohibit the consideration of “socio-economic status” in sentencing. See U.S.S.G. § 5H1.10 (Policy Statement). Thus, certain factors “such as ... socioeconomic status ... and economic hardship, are never proper bases for departure.” See United States v. Caperna, 251 F.3d 827, 830 (9th Cir.2001). We reject Rascon’s contention that United States v. Valdez-Gonzalez, 957 F.2d 643 (9th Cir.1992), permits such a departure. The departure in that case was not based on socio-economic status, but rather on the defendant’s minimal role in the offense. See id at 649 n. 3. Here, the district court rejected a mitigating role reduction based on Rascon’s admission that he twice before committed the same offense.

2. Family Responsibilities

The Sentencing Guidelines provide that “[fjamily ties and responsibilities ... are not ordinarily relevant in determining whether a sentence should be outside the…