United States v. Robert S. Wilkinson , 225 F. App'x 413 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 06-2866
    ___________
    United States of America,                *
    *
    Appellee,                   *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                 * District Court for the
    * Northern District of Iowa
    Robert Samuel Wilkinson,                 *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 23, 2007
    Filed: May 29, 2007
    ___________
    Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Robert Wilkinson challenges the 188-month prison sentence imposed by the
    district court1 following his guilty plea to a charge of aiding and abetting the
    manufacture of methamphetamine, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 841
    (a)(1), (b)(1)(C),
    and 851, and 
    18 U.S.C. § 2
    . Wilkinson argues on appeal that the district court erred
    in denying his motion for a downward departure under the Sentencing Guidelines,
    based on his post-offense rehabilitation efforts, and that his sentence is unreasonable
    1
    The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern
    District of Iowa.
    because the court did not afford sufficient weight to this rehabilitation, pursuant to 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a). We affirm.
    The district court’s discretionary decision not to depart under the Guidelines is
    unreviewable, because the court clearly understood its authority to depart but chose
    not to do so, finding Wilkinson’s efforts not extraordinary. See United States v. Lee,
    
    451 F.3d 914
    , 918 (8th Cir. 2006) (discretionary decision not to depart under
    Guidelines continues to be unreviewable on appeal), petition for cert. filed (U.S. Oct.
    30, 2006) (No. 06-7591); United States v. Chapman, 
    356 F.3d 843
    , 847-48 (8th Cir.
    2004) (because U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 already takes into account post-offense
    rehabilitation, departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0 is warranted only if defendant’s
    efforts are exceptional or fall “outside the heartland” of the Guidelines).
    Prior to pronouncing its sentence, the district court expressly stated that it was
    considering all the section 3553(a) factors and specifically considered Wilkinson’s
    post-offense rehabilitation efforts. The district court gave proper weight to
    Wilkinson’s rehabilitation efforts and sentenced him at the bottom of the advisory
    Guidelines range. See United States v. Haack, 
    403 F.3d 997
    , 1003-04 (8th Cir. 2005)
    (standard of review). The district court’s sentencing decision was not unreasonable.
    The judgment is affirmed.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-2866

Citation Numbers: 225 F. App'x 413

Judges: Wollman, Murphy, Bye

Filed Date: 5/29/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024