United States v. Brown
This text of 27 F. App'x 132 (United States v. Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
*133 MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT
Because we write for the benefit of the parties, the background of the appeal is not set out.
We reject defendant’s argument that he was entitled to a downward departure. Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b), a district court “may reduce a sentence to reflect a defendant’s subsequent substantial assistance in investigating or prosecuting another person, in accordance with the guideline and policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commissions under 28 U.S.C. § 994.” The record is clear that the District Court gave due consideration to the assistance provided by the defendant, determined that he did not provide substantial assistance as required by Rule 35(b), and exercised its discretion to sentence the defendant within the appropriate range provided by the Sentencing Guidelines.
This Court lacks jurisdiction to review a district court’s discretionary refusal to depart downward. See, e.g., United States v. McBroom, 124 F.3d 533, 541 n. 9 (3d Cir. 1997); United States v. Mummert, 34 F.3d 201, 205 (3d Cir.1994). Accordingly, appellate jurisdiction is lacking, and we dismiss defendant’s appeal.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
27 F. App'x 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-brown-ca3-2002.