Downward Departure from Sentencing Guidelines Must Result in Final Sentence Below the Original Guideline

A recent precedential case, decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, held that a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines must result in a final sentence, less than the minimum provided by the guideline. The case of U.S. v. Vazquez-Lebron involved a Defendant who had pled guilty to conspiracy to possess and intent to distribute cocaine. For his cooperation and substantial assistance in the prosecution of others involved, the Prosecution agreed to grant Vazquez a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines which suggested forty-six (46) to fifty-seven (57) months imprisonment. This downward departure was intended to lower Vazquez’s offense level by one point, changing the applicable sentencing guideline to forty-one (41) to fifty-one (51) months. At sentencing, the District Court imposed a sentence of forty-eight (48) months for Vazquez, within the range of the downward departure but overlapping with the original sentencing guidelines.

Vazquez appealed the sentence for plain error, arguing he was not given any benefit of the downward departure the Prosecution had agreed upon. The Third Circuit cited to U.S. v. Floyd, quoting “the sentence reached after granting a departure motion must be less than the bottom of the otherwise applicable Guidelines range.” The Court further explained the only way Vazquez could have been sentenced to a greater term than allowed by the downward departure is if the new sentence failed to reflect the seriousness of the crime committed. The Court found the error to be plain and prejudicial, therefore vacating the sentence and remanding the case with instruction for re-sentencing.

Sentencing

A sentencing hearing is held following a plea of guilt or a finding of guilty at trial. The purpose of the hearing is to highlight both mitigating and aggravating factors, which may affect the length of a defendant’s sentence. Some crimes carry mandatory minimum sentences, while others use guidelines which are advisory. Often times, a defendant can lower the level of his offense through mitigation; for example, cooperating with and assisting Police in an on-going investigation. There are other mitigating factors which are used to reduce a defendant’s sentence as well. An experienced criminal defense attorney is well versed in these mitigating factors, and can assist the defendant in reducing a potential sentence. If you have been charged with, or believe you are under investigation for a crime, please do not hesitate to contact the Law Offices of Marc Neff for a confidential consultation.