United States v. DelValle ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                                                            Opinions of the United
    2004 Decisions                                                                                                             States Court of Appeals
    for the Third Circuit
    7-9-2004
    USA v. DelValle
    Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
    Docket No. 03-4431
    Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004
    Recommended Citation
    "USA v. DelValle" (2004). 2004 Decisions. Paper 507.
    http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004/507
    This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
    University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2004 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
    University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
    NOT PRECEDENTIAL
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT
    OF APPEALS
    FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
    NO. 03-4431
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    v.
    JOSE DELVALLE
    Appellant
    On Appeal From the United States
    District Court
    For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    (D.C. Crim. Action No. 03-cr-00230-1)
    District Judge: Hon. Legrome D. Davis
    Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
    July 1, 2004
    BEFORE: AM BRO, ALDISERT and STAPLETON, Circuit Judges
    (Opinion Filed: July 9, 2004)
    OPINION OF THE COURT
    STAPLETON, Circuit Judge:
    Appellant Jose DelValle pled guilty to distribution of crack cocaine. He was
    sentenced to twenty months of incarceration. On appeal, he argues only that the District
    Court “erred in not granting a downward departure on the grounds that this case departed
    from the ‘heartland’ of the sentencing guidelines.” Appellant’s Br/ at 8.
    As appellant acknowledges, the District Court recognized that it had the authority
    to depart. It necessarily follows that we lack jurisdiction to review its decision not to
    depart. United States v. Vitale, 
    159 F.3d 810
    (3d Cir. 1998); United States v. Denardi,
    
    892 F.2d 269
    (3d Cir. 1989).
    The appeal will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-4431

Filed Date: 7/9/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/13/2015