United States of America v. Steven Brown

NON-PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 01-1924
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
STEVEN BROWN,
Appellant
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
(Dist. Court No. 95-92-03)
District Court Judge: Clarence C. Newcomer
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
January 17, 2002
Before: ALITO and ROTH, Circuit Judges, and SCHWARZER, Senior District Judge.
(Opinion Filed: January 29, 2002)
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM:
Because we write for the benefit of the parties, the background of the appeal
is not set out.
We reject defendant’s argument that he was entitled to a downward
departure. Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b), a district court "may reduce
a sentence to reflect a defendant’s subsequent substantial assistance in investigating or
prosecuting another person, in accordance with the guideline and policy statements issued
by the Sentencing Commissions under 28 U.S.C. 994." The record is clear that the
District Court gave due consideration to the assistance provided by the defendant,
determined that he did not provide substantial assistance as required by Rule 35(b), and
exercised its discretion to sentence the defendant within the appropriate range provided
by the Sentencing Guidelines.
This Court lacks jurisdiction to review a district court’s discretionary

-- 1 of 2 --

refusal to depart downward. See, e.g., United States v. McBroom, 124 F.3d 533, 541 n. 9
(3d Cir. 1997); United States v. Mummert, 34 F.3d 201, 205 (3d Cir. 1994). Accordingly,
appellate jurisdiction is lacking, and we dismiss defendant’s appeal.

-- 2 of 2 --