United States v. Johnson ( 1995 )


Menu:
  • USCA1 Opinion








    May 9, 1995
    [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

    ____________________


    No. 93-2172

    UNITED STATES,

    Appellee,

    v.

    VALERIE JOHNSON,

    Defendant, Appellant.


    ____________________

    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND


    [Hon. Raymond J. Pettine, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

    ____________________

    Before

    Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
    Selya and Lynch, Circuit Judges. ______________

    ____________________

    Thomas A. Grasso on brief for appellant. ________________
    Sheldon Whitehouse, United States Attorney, and Zechariah Chafee, __________________ ________________
    Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.


    ____________________


    ____________________













    Per Curiam. Defendant Valerie Johnson was indicted __________

    along with three others on various charges relating to a

    conspiracy to distribute heroin. She entered a plea of

    guilty to two counts of the six-count indictment. The facts

    are not disputed. Defendant argues only that the district

    court erred in refusing to grant her a downward departure

    based on her status as a first-time offender and as single

    mother of three minor children. See United States v. Rivera, ___ _____________ ______

    994 F.2d 942 (1st Cir. 1993).

    Defendant acknowledges in her brief on appeal that

    the district court knew that it had the power to effect a

    downward departure. She could hardly maintain otherwise as a

    review of the transcript of the sentencing hearing reveals

    that the judge was well aware of, and correctly applied, the

    analysis for such departures set forth in Rivera. See id. at ______ ___ ___

    949-50. She argues simply that the district court should

    have granted her a downward departure.

    "[A]bsent extraordinary circumstances, a criminal

    defendant cannot ground an appeal on the district court's

    discretionary decision not to undertake a downward departure

    from the sentencing range indicated by the guidelines."

    United States v. Ruiz, 905 F.2d 499, 508-09 (1st Cir. 1990). ______________ ____

    No extraordinary circumstances exist here. Thus, we have no

    jurisdiction over this appeal.

    This appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

    See Local Rule 27.1. ___













Document Info

Docket Number: 93-2172

Filed Date: 5/9/1995

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/21/2015