Opinion ID: 1196919
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Extent of the Downward Departure

Text: We turn to Pepper's next argument that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to depart downward by more than 20% based on Pepper's substantial assistance. We dispose of this argument easily. [T]he extent of a downward departure in the defendant's favor lies within the district court's discretion and is virtually unreviewable on a defendant's appeal, absent an unconstitutional motive animating the district court. United States v. Dalton, 478 F.3d 879, 881 (8th Cir.2007). As Pepper has not asserted an unconstitutional motive played a role in the district court's decision, we lack jurisdiction to review the extent of the departure. See United States v. McFarlane, 309 F.3d 510, 512 (8th Cir.2002) (citing United States v. DeBuse, 289 F.3d 1072, 1075 (8th Cir.2002)) (noting, we lack[ ] jurisdiction to review the extent of the district court's downward departure unless the defendant asserts a violation of constitutional or federal statutory law). We affirm the district court's judgment with respect to the extent of the downward departure.