Opinion ID: 5197
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Psychological Harm to a Victim.

Text: The district court accepted the PSI's recommendation for upward departure under section 5K2.3 (Extreme Psychological 14 Injury) for the psychological harm inflicted on Alvarenga. That section's policy statement authorizes an upward departure where a victim or victims suffered psychological injury much more serious than that normally resulting from commission of the offense . . . . At the outset, application of section 5K2.3 to the instant offense would appear to be barred by the statement in application note 2 to section 3D1.2 that, in the case of an immigration offense, there is no identifiable victim. The district court skirted this problem by applying section 5K2.3 by analogy to the section 2B3.2 extortion offense. There was, of course, no specified offense of conviction under section 2B3.2. We decline to decide, however, whether the district court's methodology in this instance was permissible,10 for we conclude that the factual findings of harm made by the district court did not rise to the level of that substantial impairment of the intellectual, psychological, emotional, or behavioral functioning intended by section 5K2.3 and required by caselaw to support a departure on that basis.11 The PSI's findings, adopted by the district court, 10 We limit our discussion of this issue merely to pointing out that we rejected a similar argument (albeit applied to very different facts) as to the analogous departure provision of § 5K2.8 (extreme conduct to the victim). See Roberson, 872 F.2d at 604-05. 11 See § 5K2.3 (policy statement); United States v. Fawbush, 946 F.2d 584, 586 (8th Cir. 1991) (psychological harm must be much more serious than that normally resulting from crime). Compare United States v. Morin, 935 F.2d 143, 144-45 (8th Cir. 1991) (departure held to be error; record did not support finding that victim suffered greater than normal psychological harm from offense); United States v. Zamarripa, 905 F.2d 337, 340-41 (10th Cir. 1990) (same) with United States v. Newman, 965 F.2d 206, 209-210 (7th Cir. 1992) (departure upheld; psychologist testified as to great harm, and Social Security Administration found victim totally disabled); United States v. Ellis, 935 F.2d 385, 396 n.12 (1st Cir.) (departure upheld; testimony of victim's counselor supported finding of extreme harm), cert. denied, 112 S. Ct. 201 (1991); United States v. Pergola, 930 F.2d 216, 219 (2d Cir. 1991) (departure upheld; finding supported by evidence of victim's sleepless nights and constant fear of being killed). 15 stated only in conclusionary fashion that Lara's conduct resulted in psychological harm to the alien and that Alvarenga was placed on tranquilizers due to a possible nervous breakdown. Even accepting the findings as not clearly erroneous, there is no evidence of the alleged substantial impairment or its duration. We find this an insufficient factual basis to support enhancement under section 5K2.3.