Opinion ID: 550379
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Likelihood of Recidivism

Text: 23 The district judge said at the second sentencing hearing that in addition to defendant's dependent personality disorder, departure was justified because the court is confident that the defendant will not get involved again in any type of criminal activity.... 24 Likelihood of recidivism is a factor considered by the Commission in formulation of the criminal history categories which, along with the offense level, determine the applicable guideline range. See U.S.S.G. Ch. 4, Pt. A, intro. comment. Moreover, the Commission has acknowledged that in forming broad categories of past criminal conduct, it could not guarantee that likelihood of recidivism will have been considered adequately in all cases. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 4A1.3, comment. For this reason, sentencing courts are authorized to depart from the guidelines in the limited circumstances where reliable information indicates that the criminal history category does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the defendant's criminal history or likelihood of recidivism.... Id. 25 The guidelines provide a specific limitation, however, on the power of the courts to depart on the basis of likelihood of recidivism. Section 4A1.3 holds in relevant part: 26 The lower limit of the range for a Category I criminal history is set for a first offender with the lowest risk of recidivism. Therefore, a departure below the lower limit of the guideline range for a Category I criminal history on the basis of the adequacy of criminal history cannot be appropriate. 27 U.S.S.G. Sec. 4A1.3, p.s. Defendant in this case has no criminal history and accordingly was placed in criminal history category I. As a result, the district court was unauthorized to consider likelihood of recidivism as a mitigating factor justifying departure; likelihood of recidivism was considered adequately in determining the appropriate criminal history category.