Summaries of Selected Opinions
Jurisdiction | United States,Federal |
Citation | Vol. 36 No. 1 Pg. 127 |
Pages | 127 |
Publication year | 2007 |
2007, January, Pg. 127. Summaries of Selected Opinions
The Colorado Lawyer
January 2007
Vol. 36, No. 1 [Page 127]
January 2007
Vol. 36, No. 1 [Page 127]
From the Courts
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Summaries of Selected Opinions
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Summaries of Selected Opinions
Summaries of selected Opinions appear on a
space-available basis. The summaries are prepared for the
Colorado Bar Association by Katherine Campbell and Frank
Gibbard, licensed Colorado attorneys. The summaries of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit are provided as a
service by the Colorado Bar Association and are not the
official language of the Court. The Colorado Bar Association
cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the
summaries. Full copies of the Tenth Circuit decisions are
accessible from the CBA website, http
//www.cobar.org/hotlinks.cfm (United States Courts link to
the Tenth Circuit).
Drug Possession - Downward Departure for Acceptance
of Responsibility - U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b) Motion
U.S. v. Blanco, No. 05-4087, 10/24/2006
D.Utah, Judge McConnell
The defendant pled guilty to one count of possession of
cocaine base after he was observed throwing a plastic bag
containing a green substance and a yellow rock substance onto
the roof of a building. The yellow rock substance later
tested as 6.1 grams of cocaine base. The defendant agreed to
plead guilty, in exchange for the government's promise to
recommend a two-level decrease in his offense level for
acceptance of responsibility.
Prior to his guilty plea, the defendant's attorney moved
to have the cocaine base re-weighed at an independent testing
facility. The government made the drugs available for
re-weighing, but due to its costs in doing so, it declined to
move for an additional one-level downward departure for
acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b).
In U.S. v. Moreno-Trevino, 432 F.3d 1181, 1186 (10th
Cir. 2005), the Tenth Circuit held that although a
prosecutor's decision to recommend a § 3E1.1(b) motion is
discretionary, a court can review a refusal to file such a
motion if the refusal was animated by an unconstitutional
motive, or not rationally related to a legitimate government
end. The defendant argued that the government had no rational
reason to deny him the departure merely because he sought to
re-weigh the drug sample, a right the government conceded he
had. The government, however, argued that because re-weighing
takes up government time, resources, and the energy of
agents, its policy is not to move for § 3E1.1(b) departures
in such cases.
The Tenth Circuit found nothing impermissible about the
government's reasoning. Ensuring efficient resource
allocation is a legitimate government end, and a
prosecutor's decision not to make a § 3E1.1(b) motion on
behalf of a defendant who requests independent re-weighing is
rationally related to that end. The Tenth Circuit also
rejected the defendant's argument that the
prosecutor's decision unconstitutionally interfered with
his discovery rights based in due process. This argument was
based on a misperception of the issue, which is whether the
prosecutor's decision was animated by an unconstitutional
motive, such as discrimination based on race, religion, or
gender, not whether it had some effect on the exercise of a
constitutional right. The Tenth Circuit further noted that
any form of plea bargaining involves the exchange of a right
for...
To continue reading
Request your trial