Opinion ID: 6538
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: constance dianne hendriex

Text: 43 The government also appeals the sentence imposed against Hendriex. 3 The district court limited Hendriex's role to 40 kilograms of cocaine and awarded her a two-level reduction for minor participation, arriving at a sentencing range of 121-151 months. Hendriex moved for a departure under Sec. 5H1.6 because her two children were under 5 years old and were being cared for by their 65-year-old great-grandmother with limited financial resources. The district court accepted this argument, granted downward departure and sentenced Hendriex to 78 months imprisonment, which is below the statutory minimum of ten years. 44 The government argues first that the district court was without authority to impose a sentence below the statutory minimum because the government did not move for such relief. 45 A district court's authority to sentence below the statutory minimum is circumscribed by 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3553(e), which provides: 46 Limited authority to impose a sentence below a statutory minimum.--Upon motion of the Government, the court shall have the authority to impose a sentence below a level established by statute as minimum sentence so as to reflect a defendant's substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an offense. 47 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3553(e) (emphasis added). 48 In this case, the government made no motion to depart below the statutory minimum sentence and thus, the district court exceeded its authority in sentencing Hendriex to a term below the statutory minimum. See United States v. Vilchez, 967 F.2d 1351, 1355-56 (9th Cir.1992); see also United States v. Schmeltzer, 960 F.2d 405, 407-08 (5th Cir.1992). 49 Aside from the departure below the statutory minimum, the district court justified its departure from the guideline range of 121-151 months on grounds that Hendriex had demonstrated exceptional circumstances within the meaning of Sec. 5H1.6. In granting the departure, the court stated: 50 The Court will depart, based on Section 5H1.6, for the reason that the children, that is the children of Miss Hendriex, are fairly young, that is under five years for both, and for the further reason that the grand mother, that is the person who would be supporting these children, is 65 years old, and very well may find it difficult to support these children over an extended period of time. 51 Unless there are unique or extraordinary circumstances, a downward departure from the guideline range based on the defendant's parental responsibilities is improper. See, e.g., United States v. Cacho, 951 F.2d 308, 311 (11th Cir.1992); United States v. Goff, 907 F.2d 1441, 1446 (4th Cir.1990) (district court's downward departure because defendant had three children who would be left with their grandmother was improper because [t]here is nothing extraordinary about Goff's family responsibilities.); see also U.S.S.G. Sec. 5H1.6 commentary (Family ties and responsibilities ... are not ordinarily relevant in determining whether a sentence should be outside the guidelines.) 52 The record in this case reveals that Hendriex is the single parent of two young children who will be cared for by her grandmother during Hendriex's incarceration. Although the children have some undefined medical problems, the record discloses nothing extraordinary. Hendriex has shown nothing more than that which innumerable defendants could no doubt establish: namely, that the imposition of prison sentences normally disrupts ... parental relationships. United States v. Daly, 883 F.2d 313, 319 (4th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 496 U.S. 927, 110 S.Ct. 2622, 110 L.Ed.2d 643 (1990). We therefore find nothing extraordinary about Hendriex's parental responsibilities which would warrant a downward departure below a 121 month sentence, which is at the bottom of the applicable guideline range.