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 4-21-2008 

# U SA v . J ohn D o e P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 06-5205

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . 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 and 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 ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

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

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . J o hn D oe " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1289. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/1289H o n . A rth u r L . A larcó n , S en ior Ju d g e, U n it ed S tat es C o u rt * of A ppeal s fort he N i nt h C i r cui t , s i t t i ng bydes i gnat i on. NO T PRECEDEN TI AL U N IT E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

N os . 04- 1482 , 04- 1483 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. J OH N D OE, A ppel l ant

O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt fort he East ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a ( D . C . C r i m . N os . 01- cr - 00565- 2, 01- cr - 00566- 2 ) D istri ct Ju d g e: H o n o rab le B erle M . S ch il ler

Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

A pr i l 18, 2008 B efor e: SL O V I T E R , J O R D A N , and A L A R C Ó N , C i r cui tJ udges * Fi l ed: A pr i l 21, 2008

______ OP I NI ON SL O V I T E R , C i r cui tJ udge. A pp el l ant, John D oe, w ho pled guil t yt o p art i ci pati on i n tw o d rug con spi raci es,2

se e k s re v iew o f

th e D istric t C o u rt’s o rd e r se n ten c in g h im to tw o c o n c u rre n t 1 0 0 m o n th pr i s on s ent ence s . H e ar gues t hatt hi s s ent ence cr eat ed an unw arr ant ed s ent enci ng di s par i t y , t hatw e s houl d notenfor ce hi s w ai verof appe al , and thathe w as pr ej udi ced b e c a u se th e D istric t C o u rt a p p lied th e a d v iso ryg u id e lin e s a s m a n d a to ry . In re sp o n se to t he l as tof J ohn D oe’ s ar gum ent s , t he governm entagr ees thatthi s m att ers houl d be
r emanded forr es ent enci ng. I. In 2 0 0 1 , Jo h n D o e w a s in d icte d w ith re sp e c t to tw o se p a ra te c o n sp ira c ies to tra f f ic
m a ri ju a n a in e x c e s s o f

1 ,0 0 0 k ilo g ra m s a n d m e th a m p h e ta m in e in e x c e s s o f 1 4 k ilo g ra m s . T he cons pi r aci es i nvol ved fi ve otherm en, thr ee of w hom w er e i ndi ct ed i n connec t i on w i t h bot h cons pi r aci es . C ar l os R i ver a w as onl yi ndi ct ed i n connec t i on w i t h t he mar i j uana c o n sp ira c y . Jo h n D o e p led g u iltyto th e m e th a m p h e tam in e c o n sp ira c yc h a rg e s in A p ril 2 0 0 2 , an d e n ter e d in to a c o o p e ra tio n p lea a g re e m e n t, w h ich c o n tain e d a w a iv e r o f a p p e a l,
w i t h r egar d t o t he mar i

j uana c ons pi r acy . T he governm entpr om i s ed t o cons ol i dat e the t w o cas es i f J ohn D oe ful fi l l ed hi s obl i gat i ons underthe agr eement . A tthe 2004 s ent enci ng, t he ca s es w er e cons ol i dat ed and the combi ned drug cal cul at i ons pl ace d J ohn D oe at a base offen se l evel of 36 and a cri m i nal hi st oryl evel of II un der the G uidel i nes, w hi ch, aft era thr ee- l evel adj us t m entforacc ept ance of r es pons i bi l i t y , r es ul t ed i n a s ent enci ng r ange of

151 t o 188 m ont hs . T he s t atut orym andat orym i ni m um s ent ence w as t en y ear s i n eac h cas e.3

Jo h n D o e so u g h t a do w n w ard d ep arture f rom the G u idelines an d the s tatu tory m inim u m in co n side rati o n o f h is co o p era ti o n an d assistan ce in the p rose cu ti o n o f R ivera ( t he l eade rof the mar i

j uana c ons pi r acy ) . T he governm entm oved pur s uantt o s ect i on 5 K 1 . 1 fo r a d o w n w ard d ep arture f rom the G u idelines . A cc o rdin g ly , the D istri ct C o u rt depart ed dow nw ar d fr om t he G ui del i nes and i m pos ed a s ent ence of 100 m onths foreac h c o n s p i r a c y c h a r g e , t o ru n c o n c u r r e n t l y. John D oe fil ed an app eal and the g ov ernm ent r espon ded w i t h a m oti on t o d i sm i ss t he appe al of the mar i

j uana s ent ence i n l i ghtof the appe l l at e w ai ver . T he mot i on w as re f e rr e d to th e m e ri ts p a n e l a n d is a d d re s s e d b e lo w . II. I n r e s po ns e t o the Sup r e me Cour t ’ s de c i s i on i n Uni t e d St a t e s v. Booke r , 54 3 U. S. 2 2 0 (20 0 5 ), this co u rth eld th at w h en the S en tenc ing G u idelines are tr ea ted a s m an d atory byt he D i s t r i ctC our t , pr ej udi ce i s pr es um ed and the mat t ers houl d be r emanded for re s e n te n c in g . U n ite d S ta te s v . D a v is , 4 0 7 F .3 d 1 6 2 , 1 6 4 -6 5 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ( e n b a n c ). B eca us e i n t hi s cas e the D i s t r i ctC our tdepart ed dow nw ar d fr om m andat oryr atherthan advi s or yG ui del i nes , r es ent enci ng i s r equi r ed i n t he met hamphet ami ne ca s e underour D avi s pr ece dent . I d. J ohn D oe s i gned an a ppel l at e w ai veri n t he mar i j uana c as e. H e ar gues the governm ents houl d notbe ent i t l ed t o i nvoke the appe l l at e w ai veron t he mar i j uana cons pi r acychar ge bec aus e hi s w ai verw as notknow i ng and vol unt ary . W e nee d notIn U n it ed S tat es v . G w inn ett , 4 8 3 F . 3 d 2 0 0 , 2 0 3 (3d C ir . 1 2007) , w e hel d t hatw e have s ubj ectm att erj ur i s di ct i on o v er a defe ndant ’ s app e al not w i t hs t andi ng defe ndant ’ s w ai ver . W e s t at ed fur t hert hatw e w i l l or di nar i l y not exer ci s e t hat j ur i s di ct i on, butthe governm ent ’ s w i t hdr aw al of i ts mot i on t o di s m i s s pr ovi des adequa t e r eas on forus t o acc eptj ur i s di ct i on overJ ohn D oe’s a p p e a l. 4 cons i derhi s ar gum entbeca us e the governm enthas w i t hdr aw n i t s m ot i on t o enfor ce the
w ai ver i n li gh tof the i nterrel at ed n ature of the m et ham ph et am i ne an d m ari j uan a cases. 1 Jo h n D o e f

u rth e r a rg u e s th a t re m a n d is n e c e ss a ryb e c a u se th e re w a s a d isp a rityin s ent enci ng. Speci fi cal l y , he ci t es a di s par i t ybetw een hi s s ent ence and thatof a c od e f e n d a n t , Ri v e r a , wh o m h e c h a r a c t e r i z e s a s th e l e a d e ro f th e c o n s p i r a c i e s . Of i m por t ance , how ever , i s t he fa ctt hatR i ver a l ed onl ythe mar i j uana c ons pi r acy , and w as notchar ged i n connec t i on w i t h t he met hamphet ami ne cons pi r acy . J ohn D oe and A le ja n d ro H e rn a n d e z w e re c h a rg e d in c o n n e c tio n w ith th e m e th a m p h e ta m in e c o n s p ir a c y . M or eover , m ethamphet ami ne off ens es ar e tr eat ed more har s hl ythan mar i j uana r el at ed o f f e n se s. S e e 2 1 U .S .C . § 8 4 1 (b )(1 ) (tre a tin g o n e g ra m o f m e th a m p h e tam in e a s h a rsh ly
a s tw e n tyk ilo g ra m s o f

m a riju a n a , a ra tio o f

2 0 ,0 0 0 to 1 ). H o w e v e r, b e c a u se D a v is
r equi r es r es ent enci ng undert he advi s orySent enci ng G ui del i nes , J ohn D oe w i l l have the oppor tuni t yt o m ake the di s par i t yar gum entbefor e the D i s t r i ctC ourtatr es ent enci ng, and
w e nee d notr eac h t he di s par i t yar gum entatthi s t i m e.5 III . Fort he r eas ons s etfor t h, w e w i l l r emand t hes e ca s es t o t he D i s t r i ctC our tfor
r es ent enci ng.