2008 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 2-13-2008 

# U SA v . Aguirre 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 nt i al D ocke t N o . 05-1377

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 nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

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 2008 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 ont 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 . Aguir r e " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1610. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/1610NOT 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
N O . 05- 1377
UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v . CARLOS AGU I RRE A ppel l ant

O n A pp eal F rom t he U nit ed S t at es

D istri ct C o u rt F o rt h e D i s t r i c to f

N e w J e r s e y ( D . C . C r i m . A ct i on N o. 04- cr - 00496) D i stri ctJudg e: H on . D i ckinson R
. D ebev ois e Subm i t t ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

February12, 2008 B E FO R E : SL O V I T E R , SM I T H and S T A P L E T O N , C i r cui tJudges ( Fi l ed: February13, 2008 )2 OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

ST A PL E T O N , C i r cui tJ udge: A ppel l antC ar l os A gui r r e pl ed gui l t yt o us i ng a t el ephone t o fac i l i t at e a c ons pi r acy to d istrib u te c o c a in e . H e w a s s e n ten c e d to 4 8 m o n th s o f in c a rc e ra tio n . H e n o w a p p e a ls t hats ent ence , ar gui ng ( 1) t hathe r ece i ved i neff ect i ve as s i s t ance of couns el dur i ng t he
se n ten c in g p h a se o f

h is c a se in th e D istric t C o u rt, (2 ) th a t th e D istric t C o u rt e rre d in d e c lin in g to g ra n t a d e p a rtu re f ro m th e G u id e lin e ra n g e b e c a u se o f e x tra o rd in a ryf

a m ily ci r cumst ance s , and ( 3) t hatt he D i s t r i ctC our tal s o err ed i n fai l i ng t o gr anta depa r tur e on the g rou n d that h is of

fe n se c o n sti tuted ab erran t beh av ior. A gui r r e’ s i neff

ect i ve as s i s t ance of couns el cl ai m w as notr ai s ed i n t he D i s t r i ct C o u rtan d , as a resu lt , the re co rd w as n o t dev elop ed o n the issu es ra ised b ythat claim
. In
s uch s i tuat i ons , w e dec l i ne t o r evi ew i neff ect i ve as s i s t ance of couns el cl ai m s on di r ect appea l and i ns i s tt hatt heybe addr es s ed i ni t i al l yi n t he tr i al cour ti n a col l at er al r evi ew p ro c e e d in g u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 5 , s ee, e. g. , U ni t ed Stat es v. H

ayw ood , 155 F. 3d 674, 6 7 8 (3d C ir
. 1 9 9 5 ). W e lac k ju risd ictio n “ to re v iew d isc re tio n a ryd e c isio n s [ o f a se n ten c in g c o u rt] to denydepartur es , unl es s foral l egat i ons of l egal err or . ” U ni t ed Stat es v. C ooper , 437 F. 3d 3 2 4 , 3 3 2 (3d C ir
. 2 0 0 6 ).3

F o r th e f o reg o ing rea so n s, w e w il l aff irm the ju d g m en t of

the D istri ct C o u rt
w i t houtpr ej udi ce t o A gui r r e pur s ui ng hi s i neff ect i ve as s i s t ance of couns el cl ai m i n a pr ocee di ng under28 U . S. C . § 2255.