Opinion ID: 1272723
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Booker Variance on the Drug Counts

Text: The district court also erred by granting a conditional Booker variance on the statutory, mandatory drug counts. The district court had already granted a downward departure on the drug counts through the government's substantial assistance motions. The reduction below the statutory minimum must be based exclusively on assistance-related considerations. Id. at 1131. If the court reduces the sentence further based on § 3553(a) factors, which are unrelated to assistance, the court exceeds the limited authority granted by § 3553(e). Id. at 1132. We see nothing in Gall that would call this holding into question or authorize this panel to overrule the clear holding of a prior panel. As the district court based its variance on a § 3553(a) factorthe need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities, and not § 3553(e), the court erred as a matter of law.