Opinion ID: 159764
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: conclusion

Text: 35 Relying on comment to U.S.S.G. 5K2.0, Mr. Benally argues that [a] combination of circumstances or offender characteristics may remove a case from the heartland. It is true, there occasionally may be 36 an extraordinary case that, because of a combination of such characteristics or circumstances, differs significantly from the heartland cases covered by the guidelines in a way that is important to the statutory purposes of sentencing, even though none of the characteristics or circumstances individually distinguishes the case. However, the Commission believes that such cases will be extremely rare. 37 U.S.S.G. 5K2.0 comment. (emphasis added). This is not one of those extremely rare cases. As explained above, the factor pertaining to prior conduct was legally impermissible, and the factors pertaining to intoxication, post-arrest sobriety and rehabilitation, and cooperation and assistance were factually inappropriate. Combining the legally impermissible and factually inappropriate grounds for departure cannot make this case one of the 'extremely rare' cases contemplated by 5K2.0. Contreras, 180 F.3d at 1213. We REVERSE the district court's decision to depart downward and REMAND for re-sentencing consistent with this opinion.