Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01892/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01892-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Hashim Amin Cawthorn
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1892 

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Hashim Amin Cawthorn, * 

* 

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: February 21, 2008 

 Filed: June 4, 2008

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________

BYE, Circuit Judge.

A jury convicted Hashim Cawthorn of conspiracy to distribute and possess with

intent to distribute, and knowingly and intentionally distributing, crack cocaine. He

appealed his convictions and sentence and we affirmed. The Supreme Court granted

certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded for our further consideration because

of its decision in Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. —, 128 S.Ct. 558 (2007). We

now affirm Cawthorn's convictions but reverse and remand for resentencing.

At sentencing Cawthorn asked the district court to vary downward from the

advisory guideline range of 210 to 262 months arguing the Guidelines' 100:1 ratio

Appellate Case: 05-1892 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/04/2008 Entry ID: 3440186
-2-

between crack and powder cocaine was unreasonable. The district court declined,

stating:

Mr. Cawthorn, your principal objection or your objection principally

goes to a congressional mandate that's been imposed upon the courts and

upon our sentencing regime by making the declaration that crack cocaine

is – has to be treated 100 times worse than powder cocaine. 

That has been a losing fight for 15 years among the judges in this

country. There's no way that – Congress is not inclined to change that.

I have an obligation to – to uphold the law whether I agree with it or not.

That's just one of the oaths that I've taken.

Sent. Tr. at 31.

In Kimbrough, the Supreme Court held sentencing courts may vary downward

from the advisory guidelines range based on the disparity created by the 100:1 ratio

between crack and powder cocaine offenses. 128 S.Ct. At 575-76. We have held

Kimbrough does not require district courts to consider the crack/powder disparity in

all sentences for crimes involving crack cocaine. United States v. Roberson, 517 F.3d

990, 995 (8th Cir. 2008). "[A] district court that is aware of an argument does not

abuse its discretion by not considering it." Id. (citing United States v. Miles, 499 F.3d

906, 909-10 (8th Cir. 2007)). However, "[w]hen a district court does not consider an

argument because it is unaware of its power to do so . . . a remand is appropriate." Id.

Based on this record, it is apparent the district court did not recognize its authority to

vary from the advisory guidelines sentence, and we cannot tell whether, had it know

it could vary, the court would have granted Cawthorn's motion for a downward

variance. See United States v. Thomas, No. 06-2452, 2008 WL 55402, at 4 (N.D.

Iowa. May 5, 2008). Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand for

resentencing. As for all other issued raised in Cawthorn's appeal, we affirm for the

reasons stated in our prior opinion. 

______________________________ 

Appellate Case: 05-1892 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/04/2008 Entry ID: 3440186