Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02866/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02866-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Robert Samuel Wilkinson
Appellant

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern

District of Iowa.

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Robert Samuel Wilkinson, * [UNPUBLISHED]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

Appellate Case: 06-2866 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/29/2007 Entry ID: 3313587
-2-

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.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-2866 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/29/2007 Entry ID: 3313587