___________ No. 95-2464

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Robert Dean Campbell, * * Appellant. * [UNPUBLISHED]

___________ Submitted: February 21, 1996 Filed: March 11, 1996

___________ Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Robert Dean Campbell appeals the 57-month sentence imposed by th e dis trict court after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to manufacture an d possess marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C
. §§ 841(b)(1)(B) and 846. We remand.

For sentencing purposes, Campbell stipulated that his crimina l activity involved 510 marijuana plants. Applying a ratio of one kilogram per p lant, as required by U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(6) (Nov. 1994), th e presentence report in dicated that Campbell should be held accountable for 510 kilograms of marijuana. Campbell did not object. Rather, he moved fo r a downward departure under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(b) and U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0. In suppo rt, Campbell cited the Sentencing Commission's proposed Guideline s amendment changing the marijuana equivalency to 100 grams per plant, and maintained the Commission's conclusion that the one-kilogram-per-plan t ratio was

### -2-

not justified was a mitigating factor not adequately considered when the Commission formulated the Guidelines.
The district court determined that t he Guidelines range was 57 to 71 months --based in part on the PSR's recommended base offense level--an d found that Campbell qualified, under U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2, for a sentence belo w the ap plicable mandatory minimum 60-month sentence. The district cour t denied Campbell's departure motion, noting that if Congress adopted th e prop osed amendments and the proposed amendments were made retroactive , "that will inure to the benefit of [Campbell] and we will have to take tha t up in due course." The court sentenced Campbell to 57 months imprisonment and four years supervised release. Effective November 1, 1995--five months after Campbell was sent enced- -section 2D1.1(c) was amended by replacing the one-kilogram-per-plant rati o with an instruction to treat each plant "as equivalent to 100 G o f marij uana." U.S.S.G. App. C Amend. 516 (Nov. 1995); see U.S.S.G . § 2D1.1(c) Note (E) & comment. (backg'd.) (Nov. 1995). The Commission has indicated that Amendment 516 is to be applied retroactively. U.S.S.G
. § 1B1.10(c), p.s. (Nov. 1995). On appeal, Campbell initially arguedthe district court erred in not departing downward. Subsequently, however, he requested--and was granted-

- a stay of the appeal, in light of the Commission 's vote to apply Amendment 516 ret roactively. Essentially, Campbell has abandoned his downward

departure challenge, and has replaced it with what we view as a request fo r a remand to allow the district court to consider whether he should receive a reduction in his sentence.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), a defendant sentenced to imprisonment based on a sentencing range subsequently lowered by the Commission may be entitled to a sentence reduction if the district court determines, in ligh t of the factors set forth in 18

### -3-

U.S.C. § 3553(a) (factors to be considered in imposing sentence), that a reduct ion is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by th e Commission. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a), p.s. Because section 1B1.10 does not ma ndate retroactive application of Amendment 516, but gives th e district court the discretion to resentence under the lowered Guidelines range, we remand to permit the district court to determine whether Campbel l should be given a reduction. See United States v. Coohey , 11 F.3d 97, 101 (8th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we remand the judgment of the district court for f urther proceedings consistent with this opinion.
A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.