Opinion ID: 3034347
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Allen’s Sentence

Text: [6] Allen argues that the district court erred in failing to grant him a downward departure to his sentence based on a tragic personal history and the disproportionate impact of a prior conviction. Because the district court appeared to be aware of its authority to depart downward, denial of Allen’s request is not reviewable. See United States v. Berger, 103 F.3d 67, 69 (9th Cir. 1996). However, Allen and the government agree that a remand is appropriate under Ameline. Because the sentencing judge is no longer available, the sen- tence is vacated and this case is remanded “for a full resentencing hearing.” Sanders, 421 F.3d at 1052. 14330 UNITED STATES v. ALLEN III