United States v. Lopez-Macias
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 22503
| 10th Cir. | 2011Background
- Lopez-Macias, a Mexican citizen, was indicted in Colorado for illegal reentry after deportation following an aggravated felony conviction.
- The government and Lopez-Macias entered a plea agreement, with a recommended 3-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility and guidance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
- Lopez-Macias moved for a non-Guideline statutory sentence arguing § 5K3.1 (fast-track) created unwarranted disparities under § 3553(a)(6).
- The district court denied relief, applying Martinez-Trujillo to reject fast-track disparity and then sentenced at the low end of the Guidelines range, 37 months.
- On appeal, Lopez-Macias contends the district court should have considered fast-track disparities under Kimbrough; the government asserts no unwarranted disparity and that Lopez-Macias failed to prove eligibility for fast-track.
- The Tenth Circuit ultimately holds that a non-fast-track district may vary based on fast-track disparities if warranted, but the defendant bears at least a minimal burden to show entitlement to such a variance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether courts may variably rely on fast-track disparities | Lopez-Macias argues district court may consider fast-track disparities to depart from guidelines. | The Government argues fast-tracks create no unwarranted disparity and Martinez-Trujillo controls. | Yes; district court may consider fast-track disparities when warranted. |
| Who bears the burden to show entitlement to a fast-track variance | Lopez-Macias contends the Government must show ineligibility for fast-track without publishing criteria. | The Government argues Lopez-Macias must show entitlement with available evidence. | Defendant bears initial burden to show entitlement, at least minimally. |
| Effect of Kimbrough on Martinez-Trujillo | Lopez-Macias argues Kimbrough overruled Martinez-Trujillo and allows broad variance for fast-track disparities. | The Government maintains Martinez-Trujillo remains viable to deny fast-track variance absent eligibility evidence. | Kimbrough extends to policy disagreement with § 5K3.1; Martinez-Trujillo overruled in this context. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Martinez-Trujillo, 468 F.3d 1266 (10th Cir. 2006) (fast-track disparities not unwarranted per § 3553(a)(6))
- United States v. Jarrillo-Luna, 478 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir. 2007) (fast-track disparities recognized as Congress-authorized)
- United States v. Martinez-Macias, 472 F.3d 1216 (10th Cir. 2007) (related fast-track disposition considerations)
- Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (Supreme Court 2007) (district courts may vary from guidelines based on policy disagreements)
- Spears v. United States, 555 U.S. 261 (Supreme Court 2009) (affirms Kimbrough's discretionary scope)
- United States v. Rodriguez, 527 F.3d 221 (1st Cir. 2008) (holistic 3553(a) analysis including other courts' practices)
- United States v. Arrelucea-Zamudio, 581 F.3d 142 (3d Cir. 2009) (burden and showing required for fast-track variance)
- United States v. Reyes-Hernandez, 624 F.3d 405 (7th Cir. 2010) (courts may consider fast-track disparity among § 3553(a) factors)
- United States v. Williams, 374 F.3d 941 (10th Cir. 2004) (defendant bears the burden of proving sentence reduction eligibility)