United States v. Delgado

Opinions of the United 2002 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 6-11-2002 USA v. Delgado Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 01-3270 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002 Recommended Citation "USA v. Delgado" (2002). 2002 Decisions. Paper 347. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002/347 This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2002 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu. NOT PRECEDENTIAL THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 01-3270 ___________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. GERMAN DELGADO Appellant ___________ ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY (D.C. Criminal No. 00-cr-00410) District Judge: The Honorable Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr. ___________ Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) June 7, 2002 BEFORE: NYGAARD, BARRY, and MAGILL, Circuit Judges. (Filed: June 11, 2002) ___________ OPINION OF THE COURT ___________ NYGAARD, Circuit Judge. Appellant, German Delgado, challenges the extent of the downward departure granted by the District Court in determining his sentence. The District Court concluded that Delgado was entitled to a downward departure based upon his substantial assistance. Nonetheless, the court decided that a three-month departure was all that was indicated because appellant had an extensive history as a drug dealer and because there was a substantial quantity of the drugs involved in this offense. In effect, appellant is arguing that the District Court should have departed a total of fifteen months below his applicable Guideline range instead of three months. We do not have appellate jurisdiction to review a challenge to the District Court’s discretionary decision, challenging the extent of a downward departure under U.S.S.G. 5K1.1. See United States v. Torres, 251 F.3d 138, 145 (3d Cir. 2001) (citing United States v. Parker, 902 F.2d 221, 222 (3d Cir.1990)). Thus, we will dismiss this appeal. _________________________ TO THE CLERK: Please file the foregoing opinion. /s/ Richard L. Nygaard Circuit Judge