Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-07-01369/USCOURTS-ca8-07-01369-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Corey W. Schneider
Appellant
United States
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-1369

___________

United States, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Corey W. Schneider, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: December 27, 2007

Filed: January 15, 2008

___________

Before BYE, RILEY and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Corey W. Schneider appeals the 168-month sentence that the district court1

imposed after granting the government’s Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b)

motion to reduce Schneider’s sentence based on substantial assistance. Schneider

argues that the sentence is unreasonable because the district court did not give enough

weight to his assistance and cooperation. In particular, he contends that the court

incorrectly applied the Guidelines by not taking into account the factors under

U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1(a) (providing for departure from Guidelines for substantial

Appellate Case: 07-1369 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/15/2008 Entry ID: 3391841
-2-

assistance). He asks this court to order a departure of at least 50%, rather than the

20% granted by the district court. 

We dismiss the appeal, because we lack jurisdiction to consider Schneider’s

challenge to the reasonableness of the court’s discretionary Rule 35(b) sentence

reduction. See United States v. Haskins, 479 F.3d 955, 957 (8th Cir. 2007) (per

curiam) (dismissing appeal because court of appeals lacked jurisdiction to hear appeal

of district court’s decision on Rule 35(b) motion; United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.

220 (2005), did not expand 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) to include appellate review of

discretionary sentencing reductions; although defendant framed issue as sentence’s

overall reasonableness, he was appealing ruling on motion to reduce sentence); United

States v. Sykes, 356 F.3d 863, 865 (8th Cir. 2004) (absent unconstitutional motive,

extent to which district court exercises its discretionary authority to depart is not

subject to review). 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 07-1369 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/15/2008 Entry ID: 3391841