Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Terry M. Bardwell, 956 F.2d 1163, 4th Cir. (1992)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a 1992 United States Court of Appeals case from the Fourth Circuit regarding Terry M. Bardwell's appeal of his sentence for conspiracy to distribute phencyclidine and distribution of phencyclidine. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to only reduce Bardwell's sentence based on the government's request for substantial assistance, and not to consider Bardwell's post-offense rehabilitation efforts. The Court of Appeals found that the district court correctly understood that it did not have authority to further reduce a sentence based on post-offense rehabilitation.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1992-03-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 956 F.2d 1163 Docket: 90-5719

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a 1992 United States Court of Appeals case from the Fourth Circuit regarding Terry M. Bardwell's appeal of his sentence for conspiracy to distribute phencyclidine and distribution of phencyclidine. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to only reduce Bardwell's sentence based on the government's request for substantial assistance, and not to consider Bardwell's post-offense rehabilitation efforts. The Court of Appeals found that the district court correctly understood that it did not have authority to further reduce a sentence based on post-offense rehabilitation.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    8 views2 pages

    United States v. Terry M. Bardwell, 956 F.2d 1163, 4th Cir. (1992)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a 1992 United States Court of Appeals case from the Fourth Circuit regarding Terry M. Bardwell's appeal of his sentence for conspiracy to distribute phencyclidine and distribution of phencyclidine. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to only reduce Bardwell's sentence based on the government's request for substantial assistance, and not to consider Bardwell's post-offense rehabilitation efforts. The Court of Appeals found that the district court correctly understood that it did not have authority to further reduce a sentence based on post-offense rehabilitation.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    956 F.

    2d 1163

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.
    Terry M. BARDWELL, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 90-5719.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Dec. 26, 1991.
    Decided March 5, 1992.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
    at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CR-88-70-K)
    Richard C. Bittner, Baltimore, Md., for appellant.
    Richard D. Bennett, United States Attorney, E. Thomas Roberts,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Katharine J. Armentrout, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Baltimore, Md., for appellee.
    D.Md.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before PHILLIPS and SPROUSE, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN,
    Senior Circuit Judge.
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:

    Terry M. Bardwell was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to distribute


    phencyclidine (PCP) and distribution of PCP. He later cooperated with the

    government and his sentence was eventually reduced on the government's


    motion for a departure due to substantial assistance. Bardwell contends in this
    appeal that the district court erred in refusing to consider his rehabilitative
    efforts in determining the extent of the departure. We affirm.
    2

    A motion for a downward departure under U.S.S.G. 5K1.1 is committed to


    the discretion of the district court, and we review its decision under the abuse of
    discretion standard. In this case, Bardwell claims that the district court did not
    understand its authority to depart on the basis of his efforts and achievements
    since his incarceration. The record discloses that the district court found that it
    might have authority to consider factors apart from the value of Bardwell's
    cooperation in deciding the extent of its departure, but that it found no other
    factor present which warranted departure. The court correctly viewed postoffense conduct such as rehabilitation as not providing a basis for departure.
    See United States v. Van Dyke, 895 F.2d 984 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 59
    U.S.L.W. 3246 (U.S.1990). Under these circumstances, we find that the court
    did not abuse its discretion in departing only to the extent requested by the
    government based on Bardwell's cooperation.

    Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. We dispense with


    oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
    in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional
    process.

    AFFIRMED.

    You might also like