FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E ALS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT SEPT 06 , 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 10790 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 0 3 7 - CR- 4 - SPM U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s C H A D R I C D E A N D R E A N D E R S O N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe N or the rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 6, 2006) B efo re D U B IN A , B L A C K an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: C h a d r ic D e a n d r e A n d e r s o n ap p e a ls h is 7 8 - m o n th s e n te n c e im p o s e d a f te rh isAlthough Anderson presents a downward-depa rture a rgument, which weaddre ss below, 1 he does not other

wise challeng e the district cour t’s advisory

Guidelines calculation. 2 pl e a of gui l ty t o pos s e s s i on of

c oc a i ne w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e , i n vi ol a t i on of 21 U . S . C . §§ 841( a ) ( 1) a nd ( b) ( 1) ( C ) , a nd pos s e s s i on of a f i r e a r m i n c onne c t i on w i th a d ru g traffi ck i n g o ffen se, i n v i o l at i o n o f 1 8 U . S . C . § 9 2 4 (c)(1 )(A )(i ). S p eci fi cal l y, he ar gu es (1) the di stri ctcourtshou l d h ave grant ed hi m a dow nw ar d d eparture b e c a u s e h e a tte m p te d to p r o v id e th e G o v e rn m e n t s u b s ta n tia l a s s is ta n c e , a n d ( 2 ) h is s e n te n c e is u n r e a s o n ab le b e c a u s e it d o e s n o t r e f le c t h is w illin g n e s s to c o o p e r a te w ith th e G o v er n m en t. A lth o u g h w e lac k ju risd icti o n to re v iew th e d istrict co u rt’s d e c is io n n o t to d e p a r t d o w n w a r d , w e a f f ir m a s r e a s o n ab le A n d e r s o n ’s 7 8 - m o n th se nt ence . T h e p a r tie s a r e f

a m ilia rw ith th e f

a c ts , a n d w e d o n o t r e c o u n t th e m h e r e . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o o u rs u b

je c t m a tte rju r is d ic tio n . W e b b v . W o r ldw ide Flig h t Se r v ., Inc. , 40 7 F . 3d 11 92 , 11 93 -94 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ). A dd i t i on al l y, af t erthe di stri ctcourt has a cc urat el y c al cul at ed the advi sory G ui del i nes r ange, w e r evi ew the se nt ence 1 f o rr e a s o n ab le n e s s . See U n i t ed S ta tes v. C ra w

f o rd , 40 7 F . 3d 11 74 , 11 79 (11th C i r. 2005) ( c i t i ng U

ni t ed Stat es v. B oo ke r , 1 2 5 S . C t. 7 3 8 , 7 6 7 ( 2 0 0 5 ) ) . A nd er son argues the di stri ctcourt“ shou l d h ave t aken a dow nw ar d d eparture f r o m th e S e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s ,” b e c a u s e h e “c o o p e r a te d w ith th e g o v e rn m e n t inPresumably, Ander son bases his downwa rd-departureargument on U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, 2 which provide s: “Upon motion of the g overnment stating that the de fenda nt has provided substantial assistance in the inve stigation or prosecution of another person who has c ommitt ed an off ense, thecourt may

depar t from the guidelines.” Nota bly , the Gover

nment did not file a motion to gra

nt Anderson a

downward depar

ture under § 5K1.1. 3 att em pt i ng t o g i ve subst ant i al as si st ance . ” U nd erou r pre ce dent , ho w ever , w e l ac k 2 j uri sdi ct i on t o “ re vi ew a di stri ctcourt ’ s r ef usal t o g ra nta dow nw ar d d eparture unl e s s the c our tm i s t a ke nl y be l i e ve d tha ti tl a c ke d the a uthor i ty t o gr a nts uc h a departure. ” U

ni t ed Stat es v. H

an se n , 26 2 F . 3d 12 17 , 12 56 (11th C i r. 20 01 ); U ni t ed Stat e s v . W

i ni nge ar , 4 2 2 F .3 d 1 2 4 1 , 1 2 4 5 ( h o ld in g th a t, p o s t- B oo ke r , w e s t i l l “ l ac k j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew the deci si on of the di stri ctcourtno tt o app l y ado w nw ar d de pa r tur e ” ) . W he n nothi ng i n the r e c or d i ndi c a t e s the di s tr i c tc our tm i s unde r s t ood i t s a u th o r i ty t o d e p a r td o wn wa r d f r o m th e a d v i s o ry Gu i d e l i n e s s e n t e n c e , we a s s u m e n o s u c h m is u n d e r s ta n d in g o c c u rr e d . H an se n , 262 F . 3d a t1257. A nde r s on doe s notc ont e nd the di s tr i c tc our tm i s unde r s t ood i t s a uthor i ty t o de pa r tdow nw a r d, a nd, a f t e rc a r e f ul r e vi e w , w e f

i nd nothi ng i n the r e c or d i ndi c a t i ng s uc h a m i sund er st andi ng by the di stri ctcourt . W e a cc ordi ng l y l ac k j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s r e f

u s a l to p r o v id e A n d e r s o n a d o w n w a r d d e p a r tu r e . W e n o w tu rn to A n d e r s o n ’s a r g u m e n t th a t h is s e n te n c e is u n r e a s o n ab le b e c a u s e it d o e s n o t r e f

le c t h is w illin g n e s s to c o o p e r a te w ith th e G o v e rn m e n t. W hen revi ew i ng a s ent ence for r ea sonabl enes s, w e m usteval uat e w hether the fi nalTh e§ 3 55 3( a) s e ntenc ingfac tor s in c ludethenatureand c irc ums tanc e s o f t

heof fens e 3 and the history

and cha rac teristics of the de fenda nt; the need f

or the sentence to refle ct the seriousness of theoffense, promote respec t for the law , and providejust punishm ent for the offense; the nee d to deter crime, protec t the public, and providethe def endant with educ ational or vocational training , or medical care; the kinds of sentences a vailable; the Sentenc ing Guide lin e s rang e ; pertinent p oli c y statementsof

theSentenc ingCommis sio n; t hene e d toavo id unwa rrante d s e ntenc ingdispa

ritie s; a nd thene e d toprov idere stitution to v ic tim s. 4 s e n t e n c e , i n i t s e n t i r e ty , a c h i e v e s th e p u rp o s e s o f s e n t e n c i n g a s s t a t e d i n 1 8 U . S. C. § 3 55 3(a) . U

ni t ed Stat es v. M

art i nez , 434 F . 3d 1318, 1322 ( 11th C i r . 2006) . T he 3 di stri ctcourti s notob l i gat ed t o speci fi ca l l y a dd re ss and anal yz e on the re cord e v e ry § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r ; r a th e r , a s ta te m e n t th a t th e c o u r t c o n s id e r e d th e f a c to r s is s u f f ic ie n t in p o s t- B oo ke rs e n te n c e s . U n ite d S ta te s v . Sc o tt , 426 F . 3d 1324, 1329 ( 11th C i r . 2005) . T he pa r ty c ha l l e ngi ng the s e nt e nc e be a r s the bur de n of e s tab lis h in g th e s e n te n c e is u n r e a s o n ab le in lig h t o f th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s . See U ni ted Stat es v. T

al l ey , 4 3 1 F .3 d 7 8 4 , 7 8 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . W e c on cl ud e A nd er son’ s 78-m on th sent ence i s r ea sonabl e. T he di stri ct courtst at ed i tre ac hed A nd er son’ s f i nal se nt ence af

t erca l cul at i ng the G ui del i nes ra ng e, consi deri ng the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors, and app l yi ng the G ui del i nes i n an a d v is o ry m a n n e r . C o n tr a ry to A n d e r s o n ’s a s s e r tio n s , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e x p r e s s ly consi dere d h i s w i l l i ng ness t o coo pera t e w i th the G ov ernm ent ; i nd ee d, i tse nt ence d h im a t th e lo w e n d o f

th e G u id e lin e s r a n g e “in r e c o g n itio n o f [ h is ] a tte m p t to c oope r a t e a nd a c c e pt a nc e of [ hi s ] r e s pons i bi l i ty . ” T he t ot a l t e r m of i m pr i s onm e nt i m p o sed , 7 8 m o n th s, i s n o to n l y atth e l o w en d o f th e G u i d el i n es ran g e, b u ti s al so5

fa r l ow erthan the 42 0-m on th st atut ory m axi m um se nt ence avai l abl e t o the di stri ct c o u r t. See 18 U . S . C . § 9 24 (c )( 1)(A )( i ); 21 U . S . C . § 8 41 (b)( 1)(C ). F urtherm ore, A nde r s on ha s a n e xt e ns i ve c r i m i na l hi s t ory , i nc l udi ng t e n c r i m i na l c onvi c t i ons d u r in g th e te n y e a r s p r io rto th e in s ta n t c a s e . B a s e d o n th e f a c to r s o u tlin e d in § 3 55 3(a) and o ur re vi ew of the re cord, w e c on cl ud e A nd er son h as fa i l ed t o carry h is b u r d e n o f

e s tab lis h in g h is 7 8 - m o n th s e n te n c e is u n r e a s o n ab le . Se e W i ni nge ar , 422 F . 3d a t1246. F o r th e f o re g o in g re as o n s, w e lac k ju risd icti o n to co n sid erth e d istrict co u rt’s r e f u s a l to p r o v id e A n d e r s o n a d o w n w a r d d e p a r tu r e , a n d w e c o n c lu d e h is 7 8 - m o n th s e n te n c e is r e a s o n ab le . AF F I RME D.