United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-1420

___________ United States of America, * * Plaintiff - Appellee, * * v. * * Scott Michael Dornseif, * * Defendant - Appellant. *

___________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the No. 97-1421 District of Minnesota.

___________ [UNPUBLISHED] United States of America, * * Plaintiff - Appellee, * * v. * * Kelly Jean Knorr, * * Defendant - Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: October 24, 1997 Filed: December 5, 1997

___________ Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge, LOKEN and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.Th e HONORABLE DAVID S. DOTY, United States District Judge for th e 1 District of Minnesota. -2- ___________ PER CURIAM.
Scott Michael Dornseif and Kelly Jean Knorr were charged in a multi-count indictment with met hamphetamine trafficking and money laundering. Each pleaded guilty t o conspiring to distribute over two hundred grams of methamphetamine, and the remaining counts were dismissed. At their sentencings, the district court granted the government’s 1 downward departure motions because of the substantial assistance Dornseif and Knor r providedin the investigation and prosecution of others. Dornseif and Knorr appeal the resulting sentences. We affirm. Mr. Dornseif was subject to a mandatory minimum fi ve-year sentence. The government fi leda motion for downward departure from the Guidelines sentencing range unde r U. S.S.G. § 5K1.1, but did not move for a departure from the applicable mandator y minimum sen

tence under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e). At sentencing, counsel for Dornseif, the Assistant U.S. Attorney, and a case agent advised that Dornseif had provid ed an unusually hig h level of assistance in investigating and prosecuting others. In determining th e applicable Guidelines range, the district court rejected the probation officer’ s recommendation of a two-level firearm enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1. 1(b)(1), found that Dornseif is a career offender under § 4B1.1, and found that his Guidelines range is therefore 188-235 months in prison. Turning to the question of downward departure, the court g ranted the government’s substantial assistance motion and sentenced Dornseif to 120 months in prison and five years of supervised release.
Ms. Knor r was subject to a mandatory minimum sentence but became eligible for th e mandatory minimum “circuit breaker” found in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) andU.S.S.G. § 5C1.2 when the government did not pursue an arguable § 2D1.1(b)(1)-3-

enhancement. At sentencing, the district court found that Knorr is eligible for circui t breaker relief, found that her applicable Guidelines range is 30-37 months in prison, and granted the government’s motion for downward departure under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) and U.S.S.G

. § 5K1.1. The court then imposed a sentence of 35 months in prison and fiv e years o f supervised release, explaining that a sentence of that length was needed so that Knorr may complete the Bureau of Prison’s comprehensive drug treatment program for her serious drug abuse problem. On appeal, Dornseif argues that the district court erred when it granted the government’s substantial assistance motion but then imposed a sentence without discussing th e dep arture factors listed in U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 or giving reasons for the specific departure senten ce imposed. Knorr argues that the district court erred when it granted her motion for downward departure but sentenced her near the top of the applicable Guidelines range. However, the extent of a district court’s downward departure for substantial assistanc e is not rev iewable on appeal in this circuit. As in United States v. McCarthy , 97 F.3 d 1562, 1577 (8th Cir. 1996), “[w]e decline the invitation to further c ircumscribe the district court’s discret

ion by requiring it to examine each of the listed factors in § 5K1.1,” or, in Knorr’s case, by requiring the court to parse out and explain the manner in which it has granted overlapping circuit breaker and substantial assistance relief. Accordingly, the judgments of the district court are affirmed. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.