United States v. Dyce

2 Citing cases

  1. U.S. v. Dominguez

    296 F.3d 192 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 21 times
    Holding that district court had authority to grant Section 5K2.0 downward departure despite Government's opposition

    Determining a just sentence depends upon an often complex interplay of multiple factors and we will not constrain the District Courts' discretion by holding that they may not depart for extraordinary family circumstances in any degree if the ultimate sentence imposed includes some incarceration.Cf. Johnson, 964 F.2d at 126 (observing, in affirming departure, that there was no indication of substance abuse or mental health problems); United States v. Dyce, 975 F.Supp. 17 (D.D.C. 1997) (departure appropriate where single mother had successfully completed both drug treatment and medical assistant training program and incarceration "would not serve societal interests, or those of defendant or her children"). V.

  2. U.S. v. Jaramillo

    4 F. Supp. 2d 341 (D.N.J. 1998)   Cited 4 times
    Declining to depart downward based on defendant's excellent prison record, which included job-training, adult education coursework, and tutoring other inmates, where his behavior was consistent with his pre-incarceration work experience and educational attainment

    Jaramillo cites a number of cases from other circuits in which courts have exercised discretion to downwardly depart based upon extraordinary rehabilitative efforts. See Reply at 3-4 (citing United States v. Kapitzke, 130 F.3d 820 (8th Cir. 1997); United States v. Brock, 108 F.3d 31 (4th Cir. 1997); United States v. Griffiths, 954 F. Supp. 738 (D.Vt. 1997); United States v. Dyce, 975 F. Supp. 17 (D.D.C. 1997)). In response, the Government argues while the post-conviction conduct of Jaramillo is laudable, these achievements, viewed as a whole, fail to demonstrate an exceptional or extraordinary post-conviction rehabilitation warranting a downward departure.