United States v. Julius Heard

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-2225

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Julius Malik Heard

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul

____________

Submitted: April 13, 2018 Filed: June 28, 2018

[Unpublished]

____________

Before SMITH, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Julius Heard appeals his 71-month sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, arguing that the district

1 The Honorable Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.

court erred in denying a downward departure based on overstatement of Heard’s criminal history.

Having reviewed the record, we conclude that we lack authority to review the district court’s denial of a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(b)(1) because the district court was aware of its authority to depart, and Heard does not contend that the district court had any unconstitutional motive. See United States v. Johnson, 517 F.3d 1020, 1023 (8th Cir. 2008) (“We will generally not review a decision not to grant a downward departure unless the district court had an unconstitutional motive or erroneously thought that it was without authority to grant the departure.”).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

______________________________