Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-04165/USCOURTS-ca10-90-04165-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Robert Sain McHenry
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

I / 

.,. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) 

) 

. FILBD 

Urnrcd States C◊u.rt of A a1s 

'ren•I c· ' ppe ..l 1 l.l IrCUJt 

J N 12 1 91 

.ft.OBERT L. HOECKER 

C!e!:k 

V • ) No. 90-4165 

) 

ROBERT SAIN McHENRY, ) 

) 

Defendant-Appellant. ) 

(D.C. No. 90-CR-44-W) 

(District of Utah) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before McKAY, SEYMOUR, and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

The parties have agreed that this case may be submitted for 

decision on the briefs. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 

34.1.2. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral 

argument. 

Robert Sain McHenry pleaded guilty to one count of possession 

with the intent to distribute cocaine and one count of possession 

of a firearm as a felon. See 21 u.s.c. § 841(b)(l)(B) (1988); 18 

U.S.C. § 922(g)(l) (1988). Mr. McHenry appeared before the district court on September 12, 1990, for sentencing. After finding 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-4165 Document: 010110119391 Date Filed: 06/12/1991 Page: 1 
that the appellant met the requirements of a career offender under 

the United States Sentencing Guidelines, u.s.s.G. § 4Bl.1 (1990), 

the district court sentenced Mr. McHenry to the term of 292 months 

in a federal custodial facility. The district court judge, when 

issuing the sentence, indicated his discomfort with the harshness 

of appellant's sentence given the facts before him. The district 

judge nevertheless stated that he could find "no basis in the law 

for departing downward." Record, vol. 3, at 15. 

Mr. McHenry now appeals his sentence under the career 

offender provision of the guidelines. He asserts that the district court may have incorrectly interpreted section 4Bl.1 to preclude it from departing downward. Mr. McHenry points to language 

contained in the provision stating that "a career offender's criminal history category in every case shall be Category VI." We 

have previously addressed this seemingly mandatory language and 

held that the overall policy provisions of the guidelines make 

clear that the Sentencing Commission did not intend to completely 

restrict sentencing judges from downward departure under this provision. United States v. Maldonado-Campos, 920 F.2d 714, 718-19 

(10th Cir. 1990); see also United States v. Lawrence, 916 F.2d 

553, 554-55 (9th Cir. 1990); United States v. Brown, 903 F.2d 540, 

544-45 (8th Cir. 1990); u.s.s.G. § 4Al.3. 

The government concedes that the record does not indicate why 

the trial judge determined that there was no basis in the law for 

departing downward. The government believes it to be in the best 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-4165 Document: 010110119391 Date Filed: 06/12/1991 Page: 2 
' 

. f 

interest of justice to vacate the district court's judgment and 

remand the cause for resentencing. 

A district court commits plain error when it declines to consider a defendant's request to depart downward under the mistaken 

expressed belief that it has no discretion to consider a downward 

departure from the guidelines. United States v. Jefferson, 925 

F.2d 1242, 1259 (10th Cir. 1991). Given the district judge's 

statement at sentencing that he could find no basis in the law for 

departing downward, it is unclear whether he understood his power 

to depart downward under u.s.s.G. § 4Al.3 despite the seemingly 

mandatory language contained in u.s.s.G. § 4B1.1. Because the 

district court may have misapprehended its legal authority to 

depart downward when sentencing a defendant under the career 

offender provision, we VACATE the judgment of the district court 

and REMAND the cause for resentencing. We express no view on how 

the trial court should use the discretion which the law provides. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

Monroe G. McKay 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 90-4165 Document: 010110119391 Date Filed: 06/12/1991 Page: 3