Opinion ID: 2966253
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Departure for Criminal History Category

Text: At sentencing, the district court declined Tom's request to grant a departure for an overestimated criminal history. The Probation Department calculated six points for Tom's Criminal History Category, which placed him in Category III under the Sentencing Guidelines. His criminal history was based on motor vehicle offenses, which were non-violent and not drug oriented. Tom argued that the classification overrepresented his criminal history because it was based on crimes that were not drug related. The Court refused to depart. Section 4A1.3 of the Sentencing Guidelines authorizes a reduction in a defendant's criminal history category where the sentencing court believes that the category overstates the seriousness of a defendant's prior convictions or his propensity to commit future crimes. The court of appeals has no jurisdiction, however, to review a district court's decision not to depart downward unless the district court misunderstood its authority to do so. United States v. Johnstone , 251 F.3d 281, 285 (1st Cir. 2001). Thus we would only have jurisdiction if the district court's decision not to depart [was] based on the court's mistaken view that it lack[ed] the legal authority to consider a departure. United States v. Romolo , 937 F.2d 20, 22 (1st Cir. 1991). Here, it is apparent that the district court simply chose not to depart. The district court stated that it would not grant Tom's motion for a downward departure based upon overrepresentation of criminal history because Tom had not presented sufficient facts to warrant such a departure. The district court thus clearly expressed that it had taken into account the arguments for a downward departure but concluded that the assigned criminal history category 'adequately and appropriately' represented [Tom's] extensive criminal history. United States v. Mangos , 134 F.3d 460, 465 (1st Cir. 1998). Consequently, this Court lacks jurisdiction to review the district court's denial of a downward departure for criminal history.