2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 5-17-2005 

# U SA v . F i shm an P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 03-3737

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . F i shm a n" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1181. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/1181T h e H o n o rab le Jan E . D u b o is, S en ior U n it ed S tat es D istri ct Ju d g e f o r th e E astern * D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a, s i t t i ng bydes i gnat i on. NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL

I N TH E UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS

F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT C as e N o: 03- 3737 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. DAVI D F I S HM AN, A ppel l ant

O n a p p e a l f

ro m th e U n ited S tate s D istric t C o u rt fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey D i s t r i ctJ udge: T he H onor abl e W i l l i am G . B as s l er

D i s t r i ctC our tN o. 02- cr - 00587 S u b m itte d P u rs u a n t to T h ir d C ir c u it L A R 3 4 .1

J une 16, 2004 B e f o re : A L IT O a n d S M IT H , C i r cui tJudges , and D U B O IS , D is tr i ct

Judge * ( Fi l ed: M ay17, 2005 ) OPI NI ON O F THE COURT S M IT H , C i r cui tJudge . D avi d Fi s hm an pl ed gui l t yon A pr i l 15, 2003 t o countt hr ee of an i nfor m at i on c h a rg in g h im w ith k n o w in g ly d is tr ib u tin g p s e u d o e p h e d ri n e in v io la tio n o f 2 1 U .S .C . §8 4 1 (f

)(1 ). T h e D istric t C o u rt se n ten c e d h im o n A u g u st 2 8 , 2 0 0 3 to a ter m o f six ty m ont hs . Fi s hm an appe al s , chal l engi ng onl yhi s s ent ence . H e cont ends t hatt he D i s t r i ct C our terr ed byr efus i ng t o gr anta dow nw ar d departur e underU ni t ed St at es Sent enci ng G ui del i nes ( “U . S. S. G . ”) § § 5K 2. 13, 5K 2. 0, and 5H 1. 4. A ccor di ng t o Fi s hm an, t he D i stri ctC ou rtm i st aken l ybeli eved i tdid not have the authori t yt o d epartun der t hese gu i deli nes. Fi s hm an’ s s ent ence w as i m pos ed pr i ort o t he Supr eme C our t ’ s deci s i on i n U ni t ed St at es v. B ooker , 125 S. C t . 738 ( 2005) . T her e, t he Supr eme C our tdecl ar ed thatt he U n ite d S ta te s S e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s a re o n ly ad v is o ry. I d. a t 7 5 7 . A s a re s u lt, Fi s hm an’ s s ent ence m ayhave be en af fec t ed byt he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s t r eatm entof the gui del i nes as m andat or y . H avi ng det er m i ned thatt he s ent enci ng i s s ues Fi s hm an r ai s es are b est d eterm ined b ythe D istri ct C o u rtin the firstinstan ce , w e w il l vac ate F ishm an ’s s ent ence and r emand forr es ent enci ng i n acc or dance w i t h B ooker .

______________________________________