Court Opinion

ID: 20842
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 07:38:24+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:04:38.133420
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                       ____________________

                          No. 99-41225
                        Summary Calendar
                      ____________________

                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                Plaintiff-Appellee,
                                versus

                            ALICIA WINGATE,

                                                Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Eastern District of Texas
                          (6:99-CR-2-2)
_________________________________________________________________

                              May 3, 2000

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Alicia Wingate appeals her sentence based on her guilty plea

conviction for misprision of a felony, claiming the district court

concluded erroneously it did not possess discretion under the

Sentencing Guidelines to depart downward for extraordinary family

circumstances.

     Our court has jurisdiction to review a decision not to depart

downward only if it is based on the district court’s erroneous

belief that it lacked the authority to depart. E.g., United States

v. Yanez-Huerta, No. 99-50363, ___ F.3d ___, 2000 WL 300561, at *2

(5th Cir. 23 March 2000).

     *
      Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
       The district court denied Wingate’s motion to depart because

“there [were] no factors present in [her] motion which have not

sufficiently been considered by the ... Guidelines, which would

warrant [downward] a departure....” (Emphasis added.) Because the

refusal to depart downward was not based on an erroneous belief

that   the   court   lacked   authority   to   depart,   we   are   without

jurisdiction to review the decision.

                                                              DISMISSED

                                  - 2 -