United States v. Jimenez-Perez
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 20980
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Jimenez-Perez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- He moved for a downward variance arguing unwarranted sentencing disparity due to the unavailability of a Fast Track program in the Eastern District of Missouri.
- The district court denied the motion, stating it lacked definitive guidance from the Eighth Circuit and thus lacked discretion to depart.
- The district court imposed a 30-month Guidelines sentence.
- On appeal, Jimenez-Perez contends procedural error for not recognizing discretionary authority to vary and substantive unreasonableness for ignoring § 3553(a) factors.
- The court vacates and remands for resentencing, holding the district court committed procedural error by not recognizing potential downward variance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court had discretion to vary downward for Fast Track disparity | Jimenez-Perez argues district court could variably depart for Fast Track absence. | United States argues district court lacked authority to consider Fast Track disparity after pre-Kimbrough precedents. | Yes, district court erred procedurally by not recognizing discretion to vary downward. |
| Procedural sufficiency of the sentencing ruling | Jimenez-Perez contends the court failed to acknowledge its independent authority to vary. | Government contends prior circuit rulings foreclosed such variance considerations. | Procedural error established; vacate and remand. |
| Whether the sentence was substantively unreasonable under § 3553(a) | Jimenez-Perez claims the sentence failed to account for relevant factors including unwarranted disparity. | Government maintains the district court did not abuse discretion given the factors considered. | Court declines to address substantive issue due to remand; not resolved. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reyes-Hernandez v. United States, 624 F.3d 405 (7th Cir. 2010) (discusses fast-track programs and related disparities)
- Sebastian v. United States, 436 F.3d 913 (8th Cir. 2006) (directed downward departures under PROTECT Act framework)
- Gonzalez-Alvarado v. United States, 477 F.3d 648 (8th Cir. 2007) (pre-Kimbrough stance on fast-track variance authority)
- Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (Supreme Court, 2007) (holistic consideration of § 3553(a) factors; rejects fixed ratios)
- United States v. Rodriguez, 527 F.3d 221 (1st Cir. 2008) (analysis of congressional directives vs. district court discretion)