United States v. Whitener

78 F. App'x 749
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedOctober 22, 2003
DocketDocket No. 02-1555
StatusPublished

This text of 78 F. App'x 749 (United States v. Whitener) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second 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. Whitener, 78 F. App'x 749 (2d Cir. 2003).

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Defendant David Whitener (‘Whitener”) appeals from the sentence imposed by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Joanna Seybert, J.) following Whitener’s guilty plea to conspiracy to commit mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 371. Specifically, Whitener challenges the district court’s refusal to depart downward under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 5K2.0 based, inter alia, on Whitener’s cooperation with the government and extraordinary family circumstances.

It is settled that a district court’s decision to deny a discretionary downward departure is unappealable unless the judge mistakenly believed that she lacked the authority to depart. See United States v. Ritchey, 949 F.2d 61, 63 (2d Cir.1991); United States v. Chabot, 70 F.3d 259, 260 (2d Cir.1995); United States v. Hargrett, 156 F.3d 447, 450 (2d Cir.1998); United States v. Desena, 260 F.3d 150, 159 (2d Cir.2001).

It is clear from the hearing transcript that the district court fully appreciated its power to depart downward from the Guidelines range if the circumstances of Whitener’s case so warranted. The district court explicitly acknowledged the discretion afforded under the Guidelines and gave consideration to Whitener’s contentions that he cooperated with the government, accepted responsibility for his actions and bore heavy familial responsibilities. Having considered these circumstances, the court declined to depart downward. We therefore lack jurisdiction over this appeal. See Desena, 260 F.3d at 159 (dismissing for want of jurisdiction).

For the reasons set forth above the appeal is DISMISSED.

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

Related

United States v. Trevor J. Ritchey
949 F.2d 61 (Second Circuit, 1991)
United States v. Yan Chabot
70 F.3d 259 (Second Circuit, 1995)
United States v. Hargrett
156 F.3d 447 (Second Circuit, 1998)
United States v. Desena
260 F.3d 150 (Second Circuit, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 F. App'x 749, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-whitener-ca2-2003.