United States v. Villanueva-Gonzalez

114 F. App'x 3
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedDecember 1, 2004
DocketNo. 04-3006
StatusPublished

This text of 114 F. App'x 3 (United States v. Villanueva-Gonzalez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Villanueva-Gonzalez, 114 F. App'x 3 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs by the parties and oral arguments of counsel. It is

Ordered and Adjudged that the judgment of the District Court is hereby affirmed.

Appellant, a felon previously deported after serving ten years in an American prison, pled guilty to reentry of a removed [4]*4alien after conviction of aggravated felony in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a), (b)(2). At the sentencing hearing, Appellant requested, and the District Court denied, downward departures pursuant to § 5K2.11 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which permits sentence reductions for crimes committed to avoid a “perceived greater harm” when “the circumstances significantly diminish society’s interest in punishing the conduct,” and § 5K2.12 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which permits sentence reductions for crimes “committed ... because of serious coercion, blackmail, or duress.” U.S.S.G. §§ 5K2.11, 5K2.12 (2003). We find no basis for overturning the court’s refusal to grant the downward departure, because the District Court’s refusal to depart downward where it is aware that it has authority to do so is unreviewable by this Court. United States v. Beckham, 968 F.2d 47, 53 (D.C.Cir.1992). Although there is some ambiguity in the record, this is not sufficient to overcome our presumption that the District Court “knew and applied the law correctly” regarding its authority to depart. See In re Sealed Case, 199 F.3d 488, 490-91 (D.C.Cir.1999), quoting United States v. Pinnick, 47 F.3d 434, 439 (D.C.Cir.1995).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Sealed Case No. 98-3116
199 F.3d 488 (D.C. Circuit, 1999)
United States v. Robert A. Beckham
968 F.2d 47 (D.C. Circuit, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
114 F. App'x 3, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-villanueva-gonzalez-cadc-2004.