WPCy? 6V͢ B.+o WS<2S6iGj1!TTO>PW;|/O*OFw!׉[ŃF|1!S:) I,>O=>7SݥZ tLmfYǎ 7C pL#M<Tl]'KonLh1:+A$D /XnZu&vb"gʀOo _.{9i10T9-ɘs(F :(=E:=9TOJ yp;N6g!6ڨAmu2݇vpk|~:hPFRN(I xKܛ 5Am7☓RCysș)T2J(\-ٙ;}ӔmLd 0!:^+0 0vL0 0`0 0`"1 0`1 0`1 0`B2 082 02 023 03 0:4 0Y5 0_m5 0 5 0j6 0@8 B*9 D/9 D+: 0H: D/; 0; 06< 0< 0:> 0^A> 0<>U6>U>?U*O?HP LaserJet 4,,,,,,0(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($eH+3|x  '  _\XXRequestforDownwardDeparture...  CriminalNo.00000 t Page  1  #XqX\+#(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular(3$ !  KlumperOposition to Deportation  ' .Juan Matos de Juan.0Juan Matos de Juan .    =*+s U(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular\  `(Times NewRomanTT3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  (O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(#(b$0  0` (#(#2#   .3  0 ` (#` (#(xir$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2#(  0  )3  0 (# (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2#(  a  )3  0h(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2#(   )3  0h(#h(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2#  0  )3  0(#(#({$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2#  a  )3  0p(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#2#     )3  0p(#p(# xGGaeimquy}Bullet ListBullets List    ,yAZ"Arial Regular2J+M 0_level1  X 2( ` hp x 223  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2G+M 0_level2   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2D+M 0_level3   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2A+M 0_level4  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2>+M 0_level5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2;+M 0_level6   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  28+M 0_level7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  25+M 0_level8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  22+M 0_level9    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levsl1  X 2( ` hp x 223  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levsl2   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levsl3   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levsl4  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levsl5   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levsl6   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levsl7  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levsl8   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levsl9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  >c$"Small Circle"0 >$Large Circle0  2JM 0_levnl1  X 2( ` hp x 223   5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levnl2   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levnl3   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levnl4  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levnl5   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levnl6   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levnl7  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levnl8   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levnl9    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      XXX(&H2  XXX(&H3  XXX(&H4 XXX XXX(&H5  XXX(&H6  XXX20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK`<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSa\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K`<6X9`(Courier NewK XXXSa\  `&Times New RomanS<:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/K`<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSa\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7V(X7  ?b%2A`Arial?7W(X7  XXXSa\  `&Times New RomanS&  d dU)1dxd'dxd<:zTop of For7Y(X7  ?b%2A`Arial?7W(X7  XXXSa\  `&Times New RomanSU)2dxd0KS.SampleK`<6X9`(Courier NewKSa\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK`<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSa\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  <6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial !  _XqXXX    "P'@U U INTHEUNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT    @< < FORTHEDISTRICTOFPUERTORICO  UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICA h   * t #XqXXXq+#  Plaintiff    h   *  CRIMINALNO.00000 L     `     h   vs. `     h   * $ t DEFENDANT 0  0h(#(#0h(#h(#* L (#(#   Defendant    h   *XqXXXq $  *  * ` * *  * h *  *     @@ #XqXXXqa# DEFENDANTSXqXXXqԀREQUESTFORADOWNWARDDEPARTURE    #XqXXXqt#XqXXXqTOTHEHONORABLEDANIELR._DOMINGUEZ_ " UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTJUDGE  FORTHEDISTRICTOFPUERTORICO#XqXXXqW#  E  COMESNOWdefendant_Defendant_,representedbytheFederalPublicDefender,and  respectfullySTATESandPRAYS: Z @ss# I.INTRODUCTION  2   1.The_Presentence_ԀReportinthiscasewasfiledandmadeavailabletotheundersignedon  Z February15,2001. 2   2.OnFebruary23,2001,theundersignedmetwithU.S.ProbationOfficerVictor_Canino_, !   toaddresscertainpossibleobjectionstothesame.OnFebruary26,2001,anamended_Presentence_ #" Reportwasreceived,whichaddressedtheissuesdiscussedwithMr._Canino_. j% $   3.Afterexaminingthesame,andtheamendmentsmadebytheProbationOfficer,thedefense B'"& expresslywaivesthe35daysperiodestablishedinRule32(b)(6)(A),andrequeststheCourtto )j$(  proceedwithSentencing. *B&*   4.Aswillbediscussedindetailbelow,thedefendantrequeststhatthisCourt(1)makea   downwarddepartureintheCriminalHistoryCategory,baseduponoverrepresentationofthesame,   and/or(2)makeadownwarddeparturetheadjustedoffencelevelbasedupontheexcessivenessof t  theGuidelineenhancementasapplied,and/or(3)makeadownwarddeparturetotheadjusted L  offencelevelbasedonunlistedfactorsunderGuideline5K2.0,and_Koon_Ԁv.UnitedStates,116S.Ct. $` 2035(1996). 8  @ II.PERTINENTBACKGROUNDANDGUIDELINECALCULATION      5.The_Presentence_ԀReport,startingatpage2,calculatesMr.Defendantsoffencelevel.   Accordingtothesamethebaseoffencelevelis8,accordingtoGuideline2L1.2.Thebaseoffence  levelisincreasedby16pointsduetotheapplicationofGuideline2L1.2(b)(1)(A).Threepointsare \ reducedbaseontimelyacceptanceofresponsibility.TheaboveplacesMr.Defendantinanadjusted 4p offencelevelof21.  H   6.The_Presentence_ԀReport,startingatpage3,calculatesMr.DefendantsCriminalHistory   Category.   (Gy3"3"  3{2G3  0    OnApril17,1991,Mr.Defendantwasconvictedofpossessing10_glassine_Ԁpacketsofheroin. ! HewassentencedbytheSupremeCourtofProvidence,RhodeIslandto6monthsprobation. l# Forthisoffencehewasawarded1criminalhistorypoint.3{݌D% (#(# Ќ  "3"  3g2G3  0    OnAugust18,1992,thedefendantwasconvictedof21U.S.C.841intheU.S.DistrictCourt 'X" fortheDistrictofRhodeIsland.Hewassentencefo21monthofimprisonmentand5years (0!$  ofsupervisedrelease.Forthisoffencehewasawarded3criminalhistorypoints3g݌*#&(#(# Ќ    7.Atotalof4criminalhistorypointsplacethedefendantataCriminalHistoryCategoryof   III,whichcoverfrom4to6criminalhistorypoints.   @ III.ARGUMENTINFAVOROFADOWNWARDDEPARTURE  t  @(( A.DownwardDepartureBasedonOverRepresentationofCriminalHistory  L    8.Mr.Defendanthastwopriorconvictions.However,withoutdenyingorminimizingthem, $` theyarenotasegregiousastheymightinitiallyappear. 8    9.OnApril17,1991,Mr.Defendantwasconvictedofpossessing10glassinepacketsof   heroin.HewassentencedbytheSupremeCourtofProvidence,RhodeIslandto6monthsprobation.     10.Thistermofsupervisionwasapparentlydeemedsonegligiblebythesentencingcourtthat  itwasimposedasanunsupervisedprobation. \   11.Secondly,onAugust18,1992,thedefendantwasconvictedof21U.S.C.841intheU.S. 4p DistrictCourtfortheDistrictofRhodeIsland.Hewassentenceto21monthofimprisonmentand  H 5yearsofsupervisedrelease.     12.Specificallythedefendantwasfoundresponsibleforthepossessionof27.12gramsof  cocaine.AccordingtotheSentenceenteredbyU.S.DistrictJudgeRonald_Lagueux_,theadjusted ! offencelevelwas12,andthedefendanthadnopriorconvictions.HoweverthatCourtmadean l# upwarddeparture,andsentencedhimatCriminalHistoryIII. D%    13.WhilethevalidityoftheconvictionbyRhodeIslandDistrictCourtcannotbechallenged 'X" inthisproceedings,itispertinenttodiscussthereasonablenesstheupwarddepartureThisis (0!$  particularlysosince,aswillbeseen,therecommendationbytheProbationOfficer,anddeparture *#& _madebytheRhodeIslandDistrictCourt,wasmadesecondguessingtheRhodeIslandstatecourt.  Thepertinentpartofthe_Presentence_ԀReportreadsasfollows:    8  Inthisinstance,itisbelievedthatthedefendantscriminalhistorycategoryunder t  representshiscriminalactivities.Mr.Defendanthastwopriordrugrelatedarrests, `  which,thusfar,haveresultedinoneconvictionforwhichhereceivedaprobationary L  sentence.Itisnotedthatthedefendantwaschargedwithpossessionofheroinwhen, 8t moreappropriatelyitmighthavebeenpossessionwithintenttodeliveredheroin.Had $` thedefendantreceivedaminorjailsentenceinthatcase,hiscriminalhistorycategory L  wouldhavebeenII.Additionally,thedefendanthaspendingchargesintheStateof 8  Connecticut,whichincludepossessionwithintenttosellanetweightof300.1grams $  ofcocaine/cutmixtureof300.1gramsofcocainecut/mixwitha87.33%purity.He   wasonbailfromthischargewhenhecommittedtheinstantoffence,Consequently,   acriminalhistoryofIIIwouldappeartobemorerepresentativeofthedefendants   priorcriminalactivities,Atotaloffencelevelof14withacriminalhistorycategory   ofIII,wouldhaveresultedinaguidelineimprisonmentrangeof2127months.     14.Mr.Defendantbaseoffencelevelwasthenexttolowestoffencelevelavailableinthe \ drugquantitychartofGuideline2D.1.Ifthedefendanthadbeencorrectlysentenced,accordingto 4p theGuidelines,hewouldhavebeenexposedfrom10to16monthsofimprisonment.  H   15.Theenhancementwasunreasonableandunjustified,notsustainedbythefacts,andas   statedbefore,secondguessingtheRhodeIslandStateCourt,whichwastheCourtwhohadthecase  andthefactsbeforeit,andwhowasinthebestpositiontomakesentencingdeterminationsand ! exerciseadequatesentencingauthority. l#   16.IfweweretosecondguesstheRhodeIslandDistrictCourt,asitdidthestatecourt,and D%  hadthebeendefendantproperlysentenced,hemighthavebenefittedfromadepartureunder 'X" ApplicationNote5ofGuideline2L1.2.Thesamereadsasfollows: (0!$ ` `  Aggravatedfeloniesthattriggertheadjustmentfromsubsection *#& (b)(1)(A)varywidely.Ifsubsection(b)(1)(A)applies,and(A)the +#' defendanthaspreviouslybeenconvictedofonlyonefelonyoffense; ,$( (B)suchoffensewasnotacrimeofviolenceorfirearmsoffense;and -%) _(C)thetermofimprisonmentimposedforsuchoffensedidnot  exceedoneyear,adownwarddeparturemaybewarrantedbasedon  theseriousnessoftheaggravatedfelony   ` `   17.AlthoughMr.Defendantsunderliningoffensetechnicallyqualifiesforthe16point t  enhancementdictatedbyGuideline2L1.2(b)(1)(A),italsojustifiesadepartureduetothe L  seriousnessofsaidoffense. $`   18.Basedontheabovearguments,itisrequestedthattheCourtconsiderloweringthe 8  criminalhistorycategoryofdefendanttocategoryII.   @   B.DownwardDeparturetotheAdjustedOffenceLevelBasedon   @ Unreasonablenessof16levelenhancementforAggravatedFeloniesG-      19.TheonlyreasonthatMr.Defendantisconsideredanaggravatedfelon,andimposeda16 p pointenhancementasanaggravatedfelon,isduetothefactthatanyandalldrugrelatedconvictions, H indifferentofthekindofsentenceimposed,areconsideredaggravatedfelonies.Underthatscheme  \ asentenceofprobation,andasentenceof10yearsofincarcerationareconsideredinthesame 4 manner.TheGuidelinecalculationasdeterminedinthePresentenceReportsignificantlyover   representshissituation,andtheappropriatepunishmentfortheoffence.     20.TheargumentastotheseriousnessofMr.Defendantspriorconvictionandthe16level " enhancementoftheguidelinesarethefactsofsaidconviction.WhenarrestedMr.Defendant X$ possessedatotalof27.12gramsofcocaine.Suchasmallamountofcocaine,thenexttolowest 0&l! levelinthedrugquantitychart,isdifferentinkindanddegreethan,andoutsideofthenormof,other (D # offenseslikelargescaledrugchargesandmurderchargeswhichalsotriggerthe16level )"% enhancement.Congressmayhavebenjustifiedinlumpingtogethertheverydifferentcategoriesof +#' aggravatedfelonieswhenenactingtheImmigrationlaws.However,theapplicationofthe16level -%) enhancementinthesamemannertoapersonconvictedofmurderorlargescaledugtraffickingand  oneconvictedasMr.Defendantofa27.12gramssaleofcocaineisunfairandinappropriate.     21.Theunreasonablenessofthesituationbecomesapparentwhencomparedwithother t  guidelines.TheusualincreaseprescribedbytheGuidelinesisfrom2to4levelforanyone L  individualfactor.Inaggravatedfelonysituationstheincreaseisof16levels.Thisincreaseismore $` shockingwhencomparedwiththefollowing. 8  "3"  362G3  0    Ifhecommittedahatecrime,wastheleaderofaconspiracy,theenhancementwouldbeof   only4pointsSeeGuideline3A1.1.366݌ (#(# Ќ  "3"  382G3  0    Ifhecommittedanactofterrorism,theenhancementwouldbeof12points.SeeGuideline  3A1.4.38/8݌\(#(# Ќ  "3"  3-92G3  0    Hewouldhavetotransportortransmitbetween$5,000,000and$10,000,000instolen 4p property,ordefraudbetween$20,000,000and$40,000,000,toreceivea16point  H enhancement.SeeUnderGuideline2F1.1(b)(1)(Q).Launderinganyamountover   $100,000,000wouldonlyreceivea13pointenhancement.SeeGuideline2S1.1(b)(2)(n).3-9Z9݌(#(# Ќ  "3"  3e;2G3  0    Ifhewaschargedwithmanslaughter,allviolenceandweaponsinjuryincreasesaretopedat ! 9levels.SeeGuideline2A2.2(b)(3).3e;;݌l#(#(# Ќ  "3"  3<2G3  0    Ifheweretoinanywaypersuadeaminortoengageinprohibitedsexualconduct,the D%  increasewouldbeofonly7levels.SeeGuideline2G2.2.3<<݌'X"(#(# Ќ  "3"  3>2G3  0    Ifheweretocauseorthreatenwithphysicalviolencetoobstructjustice,theincreasewould (0!$  beofonly8levels.SeeGuideline2J1.2.3>4>݌*#&(#(# Ќ  "3"  3c?2G3  0    Inheweretoengageinslavery,andtheslavesufferedpermanentorlifethreateninginjury,   theincreasewouldbeofonly4levels.SeeGuideline2H4.1()b(1)(A)3c??݌ (#(# Ќ  "3 "  3@2G3  0    Ifheweretotransportover1000poundsofexplosivematerial,theincreasewouldbeofonly t  5levels.SeeGuideline2K1.3(b)(1)(e).3@A݌L (#(# Ќ  "3 "  3(B2G3  0    Ifheweretobrandishaweaponinsideanaircraftwithdisregardofsafetyforhumanlife,the $` increasewouldbeof15levels.SeeGuideline2K1.5(b)(1).3(BUB݌8 (#(# Ќ  "3 "  3C2G3  0    Ifheweretotransportover50firearms,theincreasewouldbeof6levels.SeeGuideline   2K2.1(b)(1)(F).3CC݌ (#(# Ќ  "3 "  3D2G3  0    Ifheweretosmuggleover100aliensintotheUnitedStates,orfalsifyover100passports,  theincreasewouldbeof9levels.SeeGuideline2L1.1(b)(2)(C).Ifanalienweretodie \ duringthesmuggling,theincreasewouldbeofonly8levels.SeeGuideline2L1.1(b)(6)(4).3DD݌4p(#(# Ќ  "3 "  3F2G3  0    Ifheweretodischargeinacontinuous,mannertoxicsubstancesintotheenvironment,the  H increasewouldbeof6levels.SeeGuideline2Q1.2(b)(1)(A).3FF݌ (#(# Ќ    22.Obviously,itisimpossibletoreconcilesuchastonishingdisparities.Theonlywaya  sensibleresultcanbeobtainedinthismatteristhroughaggressiveuseoftheCourt sauthorityto ! depart. l#   23.InUnitedStatesv.Hinds,803F.Supp,675(W.D.N.Y.1992),affirmedbytheSecond D%  CircuitwithoutwrittenopinioninUnitedStatesv.Hinds,992F.2d321(1993),theWesternDistrict 'X" ofNewYorktackledasimilarsituation.Mr.Hindwasfacingthesame16levelenhancement. (0!$ Analyzingthesituation,andtheunfairnesscreatedbythisGuideline,theDistrictCourtstates *#& 8  However,itisinappropriateanditmakesforanunfairsentencetoapplythe ,$( Commissionsschemeinthesamemannertoapersonconvictedofmurder,which -%) "P' " "  carriesapossiblelifesentence,tooneconvictedofmoneylaundering.Perhapsthe  16levelincreaseresultedfromtheCommissionsconcernwithmajordrugdealers  involvedinlargescalecocaineorheroindistributionintheUnitedStates.Clearly, v  defendantHindsfailstomeetthatdescription.TotreatMrHindsinsuchamanner b  isessentiallyunfair.N    K  24.ThisGuidelinecameintoeffectfollowinglegislationthatincreasedthestatutory &  maximumforillegalreentry.Thelegislativehistoryofthechangeinthatstatuteilluminateswhyand ` whenCongressfeltincreasedpunishmentswereappropriate.InthedebateleadingtopassageofPub. 8  L.100690,SenatorAlphonseD Amatostated:   8  Thesefelonsareinvolvedinanarrayofillegalenterprisesincludingdrug   trafficking,moneylaundering,fraudulentcreditcardrings,racketeering,weapons r  salesandprostitution.133Cong.Rec.S499201.O^     25.SenatorD Amatodescribedthe expansivedrugsyndicatesestablishedandmanagedby 6 illegalaliens[inFlorida].Id.HestatedthatthesesyndicatescanbetracedthroughCentralAmerica p andtheCaribbeanandthey operatemanyofthedrugnetworks...crack,cocaine~andheroin...in H FloridaandthroughouttheUnitedStates.Id.SenatorD Amatoalsopointedoutthatthegovernment   knowsofclandestinedrugslabsintheUnitedStatesrunbyillegalColombians,agroupofNigerians  involvedinheroindrugsmugglingoperations,andof oneofthelargestandmostwidespreadcrack n! operationsintheUnitedStatesrunbyillegalHaitians.SenatorD Amatowentontodescribe F# specificexamplesofindividualshecontemplatedwouldbeprosecutedunderthenewenhanced %  penalties: &X" 8  ..policeofficersinFloridaarefamiliar"withanillegalHaitianwhohaseighteen (0!$ activewarrantsagainsthimfordrugoffenses.Policehaveseizedthreepassports )"% issuedtohiminthreedifferentnames,elevendriver slicenses,immigrationcards *#& andnumerousfirearmsandstolenproperty.+#'     ~,$( 8  [lawenforcement]insouthernCaliforniaapprehendedaColumbian...[who]has   beendeportedpreviouslyfromtheUnitedStatesandaccordingtotheDrug  EnforcementAdministration(DEA)islinkedwithfiftydrugrelatedmurdersandis v  currentlythesubjectofsixdrugkillingsintheNewOrleansareaandaseriesofdrug b  dealingsinCalifornia.Id.UN      26.SenatorD Amato,insupportofhisbill,emphasizesthatThesealiensarenotexceptions, &  butrather,among100,000illegalalienfelonsintheUnitedStatesId. `   27.Thus,SenatorD AmatodescribedthetypeofillegalalienthatCongressenvisioned 8  wouldbepunishedunderthestatuteinquestion.That heartlanddoesnotdescribeJulioCesar   Defendant.Hehasan aggravatedfelonyconviction,therealitybeingthatitisforrelativelyminor   drugtransaction.Hehasabsolutelynotiestothecrimeunderworld.Heshouldbepunished ^ accordingly.Ourrecommendationfitsthecrimeandthedefendant. 6   28.Sittingenbanc,theNinthCircuitfoundthattheillegalreentryguidelineto p disproportionatelypunishindividuals,inthatcaseandforobviousgeographicalreasonsusually H Mexicans,whohavebeendeportedfollowingconvictionforand aggravatedfelony.UnitedStates   v.SanchezRodriguez.161F.3d556(9thCit.1998)(enbanc).TheNinthCircuitauthorized  downwarddeparturesinsuchcaseswheretheextraordinaryenhancementfoundinGuideline2L1 n! .2(b)(1)(A)overstatesthesignificanceofadefendant scriminalhistory.TheNinthCircuitruledas F# itdidbecauseprincipalsoffairnessandproportionalitywouldbeoffendedwerethecourtwithout %  departureauthorityinsuchcases.Inthisregard,theNinthCircuitappliedthereasoningsetforthin &X" UnitedStatesv.Reves,8F.3d1379(1993),whereinthecourtencourageddeparturestoavoid (0!$  disproportionatepunishmentofvastlydifferentindividualswhofallwithinasingleguideline *#& application.Keyesat1385.ThereasoningofSanchezRodriguezandRevesisespeciallyappropriate ~,$( inMr.Defendant scasebecausehissituationfallsfaroutsidethe heartlandofillegalreentry  cases.InthisregarditisinstructivetounderstandtheoriginofthedraconianreachofGuideline v  2L1.2(b)(1)(B). N  @   C.DownwardDeparturetotheAdjustedOffenceLevelBasedon &  @G G UnlistedFactorsunderGuideline5K2.0Kb  t   29.Guideline5K2.0isapolicystatements,andprovidesas L  8  aXqXXXq   SUnder18U.S.C.3553(b),thesentencingcourtmayimposeasentenceoutside $  therangeestablishedbytheapplicableguidelines,ifthecourtfinds"thatthereexists   anaggravatingormitigatingcircumstanceofakind,ortoadegree,notadequately   takenintoconsiderationbytheSentencingCommissioninformulatingtheguidelines   thatshouldresultinasentencedifferentfromthatdescribed."Circumstancesthat r  maywarrantdeparturefromtheguidelinerangepursuanttothisprovisioncannot,by ^ theirverynature,becomprehensivelylistedandanalyzedinadvance.Thedecision J astowhetherandtowhatextentdepartureiswarrantedrestswiththesentencing 6 courtonacasespecificbasis...."   A  8  SaAg  Where,forexample,theapplicableoffenseguidelineandadjustmentsdotakeinto  considerationafactorlistedinthissubpart,departurefromtheapplicableguideline  rangeiswarrantedonlyifthefactorispresenttoadegreesubstantiallyinexcessof  thatwhichordinarilyisinvolvedintheoffense....Agg݌x   Ќ  A  8  S lAi  0`   ...Ai(j݌ l` `  Ќ  A  8  S I Aj  Finally,anoffendercharacteristicorothercircumstancethatis,intheCommission's   view,"notordinarilyrelevant"indeterminingwhetherasentenceshouldbeoutside ! theapplicableguidelinerangemayberelevanttothisdeterminationifsuch t" characteristicorcircumstanceispresenttoanunusualdegreeanddistinguishesthe `# casefromthe"heartland"casescoveredbytheguidelines.Ajj݌L$   Ќ  c S#XqXXaXqc#  30.Mr.DefendantisaresidentoftheDominicanRepublic,withoutlegalstatusintheUnited % States.Basedonlyonhisalienage,heisbarredfromreceivingvariousofthebenefitsotherinmates, c'  whoareU.S.citizens,receivewhileincarceratedundertheCustodyoftheBureauofPrisons.Among ;)!"  thelimitationsare: +u#$ "3"  3co2G3  0    Hewillneverbeeligibleforintermittentconfinement,homedetention,community   confinementorbedesignatedtoaminimalsecurityprison;3coo݌v (#(# Ќ  "3"  3p2G3  0    Heisnoteligibleforbootcamp;3pp݌N (#(# Ќ  "3"  3q2G3  0    Heisnoteligiblefortheintensivedrugrehabilitationprogram,andevenifhetakespartin &  thesame,hewillnotreceiveanybonustowardshissentence.3qq݌`(#(# Ќ    31.TheFirstCircuithasnotaddressedtheissue.HowevertheSeventhCircuitdidsoinU.S. 8  vsFarouil,124F3d.838(1997),determiningthatthereis noreasontobelievethattheGuidelines   haveaccountedfordefendantsstatusasadeportablealien....8 @ Thedistrictcourtisfreetoconsider   defendantsstatusasalienresultsinunusualorexceptionalhardshipconditionsofconfinement. ^   32.Inthesamevein,inU.S.vsSmith,27,F3d,649(D.C.,1994)theDistrictofColumbia 6 Circuitdetermined,inadrugcase,that adownwarddeparturemaybeappropriateofthedefendants p statusasadeportablealienislikelytocauseafortuitousincreaseintheseverityofthesentence. H   33.Mr.Defendantsituationistheoneconsideredinthislineofcases.Dueexclusivelytohis   alienage,hissentencewillbemoreseverethanthatofaU.S.citizenwhowasimposedexactlythe  sametermofimprisonment. n! @  IV.RECOMMENDEDDOWNWARDDEPARTURE  F#   34.ThedefenseisrequestingtheCourttoconsidertwodeparturealternatives,onewhich %  wouldresultinloweringtheadjustedoffencelevel,andanotherwhichwouldresultinloweringthe &X" criminalhistorycategory. (0!$   35.IfMr.Defendantwassentencedtotheimprisonmentrangeapplicableforanon *#& aggravatedfelon,hissentencewouldbeabaseoffenselevelof8basedon2L1.2(b)(1)(B)plus_4 ~,$( levelsforthefelonyenhancementdescribedinsection(B)andareductionof2levelsforMr.  Defendantsacceptanceofhisresponsibility,foratotaladjustedbaseoffenselevelof10.This v  adjustedbaseoffenselevelof10withacriminalhistorycategoryofIIIresultsinanimprisonment N  rangeof10to16months. &    36.Ontheotherhand,ifsentencedaccordingtotheguidelinerangeresultingfromabase ` offenselevelof21andacriminalhistorycategoryofI,theresultwouldbeaguidelinerange37to 8  46months.IfhewereconsideredacriminalhistorycategoryofII,theresultwouldbeaguideline   rangeof41to51months.     37.Inviewofthepreviousanalysiswebelievethatadownwarddepartureiswarranted. ^   38.Thissentencewouldbeajustandfairone,andwouldbeproperpunishmentforMr. 6 Defendant,asmandatedby18U.S.C.3553 p @ V.GROUNDSFORTHECOURTSAUTHORITYTODEPART  H   39.Aswillbediscussedindetailbelow,thisCourthasauthoritytodepartunderandunder   _Koon_Ԁv.UnitedStates,116S.Ct.2035,2045(1996)anditsprogeny.    40.TheUnitedStatesSentencingGuidelineswerecreatedinordertofurtherthebasic n! purposesofcriminalpunishment.Section3553(a)(2)ofTitle18,providesthatasentencemust F# reflecttheseriousnessoftheoffense,promoterespectforthelawandprovidejustpunishmentfor %  thatoffense.Itmustaffordadequatedeterrencetocriminalconductandprotectthepublicfrom &X" futurecrimesofthedefendant.Itmustalsoprovidethedefendantwiththeneedededucationalor (0!$  vocationaltraining,medicalcareorothercorrectionaltreatmentinthemosteffectivemanner.At *#& sentencing,theCourtmustimposeasentencesufficient,butnotgreaterthannecessaryandcomply  withthepurposesunderliningtheneedtoimposeasentence. v     41.TheUnitedStatesSentencingCommissionwasveryclearinestablishingitspolicy N  statement.TheCommissionsoughttocreateasentencingsystemthatwasfairandeffective.It &  soughtareasonableuniformitybetweensentencestoavoidtheprevailingsituationatthattimewhere ` peoplewerebeingsentencedtoindeterminatesentencesandtheparoleboardhadtheresponsibility 8  ofdetermininghowmuchofthesentencethepersonwouldactuallyserveinprison.However,   tensionwascreatedbetweentheideaofproportionalityanduniformity.Havingafewsimple   categorieswouldlumptogetheroffenses,differentinimportantaspectsandalthoughtheresultwould ^ beauniformsentence,theproductwouldbeanonproportionalsentencetotheindividualaspects 6 ofthecase.ThefinaloutcomeoftheCommissionseffortsisasetofcategories,relativelybroad p whichomitdistinctionsthatinsomeinstancesmaybeimportantyetincludesmostofthedistinctions H requiredbystatuteandthedatacollected.     42.Althoughrelevantdistinctionswilloccurrarely,whentheydo,theCourthasthepower  todepartfromtheguidelines.SeeChapter1Pt.AoftheGuidelines.TheCourtisallowedtodepart n! downwardfromtheproposedsentencingrangewhenever thereexistsa...mitigatingcircumstance F# ofakindortoadegree,notadequatelytakenintoconsiderationbytheSentencingCommissionin %  formulatingtheguidelinesthatshouldresultinasentencedifferentthanthedescribed.See18 &X" U.S.C.3553(b)andGuideline5K2.0. (0!$   43.Thereisnoexpresslimitationonthedistrictcourtsdiscretioninsentencingonceithas *#& validlydecidedtodepart.UnitedStatesv.Alvarez,51F.3d.36,41(5thcir.1995).Inviewthatthe ~,$( natureandcircumstancesofanunderliningaggravatedfelonyarenotpartofthelistoflimited  prohibitedbasis,theDistrictCourtmaydepartinitsdiscretionunderthesebasis.SeeUnitedStates v  v._Snchez_ԄRodriguez,161F.3d.556,560(9thcir.1998) N    44.AccordingtothepolicystatementoftheSentencingCommission,departuresare &  approvedwhenfactorsexistinaparticularcasethathavenotbeengivenadequateconsiderationby ` theCommissionorwhentheapplicationoftheguidelinesinaparticularunusualcircumstance 8  resultsinadequate._USSG_Ԁ5K2.0andUnitedStatesv._Daz_Ԅ_Daz_,135F.3d.572,580(8th.Cir.   1998)     45.In_Koon_Ԁv.UnitedStates,116S.Ct.2035,2045(1996),theHonorableCourthadthe ^ opportunitytoclarifythedifferencebetweenencouraged,discouragedandprohibiteddepartures. 6 ThedeparturestheCommissionchosetoprohibitareonlyafew.TheCommissionalsoprovided p guidanceastothediscouragedandencourageddepartures.Theencouragedfactorsthatwarranta H departurefromtheguidelinesarethose thattheCommissionhasnotbeenabletotakeintoaccount   fullyinformulatingtheguidelines.    46.SomeofthesedeparturesarefoundinApplicationnotesoftheguidelines,othershave n! beenrecognizedthroughleadingcasesandyetothers,duetothevastnumberofpossibilities,have F# yettobepresentedbeforethecourtinatypicalcases.TheGuidelinesManualcommentaries,which %  interpretsorexplainsaguideline,isauthoritativeunlessitviolatestheConstitutionorafederal &X" statute._Stinson_Ԁv.UnitedStates,113S.Ct.1913(1993). (0!$   47.IftheCourtweretoconsiderunderApplicationnote5,asdiscussedabove,onceitis *#& determinedthataparticularcasecomplieswiththethreeprerequisitesdeterminedintheApplication ~,$( note5,thereisnoexpresslimitationontheDistrictCourtsdiscretiononhowfartodepart.United  Statesv.Alvarez,51F.3d.at41. v    48.Thisdeparturegivesthesentencingcourtauthoritytoconsidereachcaseseparatelyand N  individuallyanddetermineasentencetailoredtotheseriousnessofthecrime.ItgivestheJudgethe &  opportunitytostrayfromtheimpersonalsentencingformula,whichdoesnttakeintoconsideration ` allnecessaryfactors.Itrejectsthetechnicalapplicationofthe16levelenhancementforanyprior 8  whichfitstheaggravatedfelonydefinition,withoutconsideringthataggravatedfeloniesvarygreatly.   Somearemoreseriousthanothers.Someareworththe16leveladjustment,somearenot.The   sentencingcourtmustthen,afterapplyingtheenhancement,determinewhetheradownward ^ departureiswarranted.UnitedStatesv._Snchez_ԄRodriguez,161F.3d.at560.#X!XXXq 6 #XqXX#X!*#  WHEREFORE,defendantrespectfullyrequeststhisHonorableCourttotakenoticeofthe p above,andfortheforegoingreasons,werespectfullyurgedownwarddeparturesinaccordancewith H theargumentandauthoritysetforthabove.XqXXXq   #XqXXXq蘛#  InSanJuan,PuertoRico,this  September10,2001!  .     `     h   JosephC.Laws,Jr. n!    `     h   FederalPublicDefender Z"    `     h      `     h   _____________________ %     `     h     &l!    `     h AssistantFederalPublicDefender &X"    `     h   _USDC_ԄPR 'D #    `     h   259F.D.Roosevelt (0!$    `     h   _Hato_ԀRey,P.R.00918 )"%    `     h   TEL.(787)2814922 *#& Ѐ    h   FAX.(787)2814899 +#'  j-%) Ї@""CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE    IHEREBYCERTIFY:ThatacopyoftheforegoingMotionwasX XXXqԀservedoncounselforthe v  government,U.S.AttorneyGuillermoGil(Attn:AssistantU.S.Attorney_Aixa_Ԁ_Maldonado_)by v  deliveringittohisofficeattheFederalBuilding,Carlos_Chard;n_ԀAvenue,SanJuan,PuertoRico.#XqXXX # V     `     h    p     `     h AssistantFederalPublicDefender