United States v. Michael Devon Lipman
98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 195, 98 Daily Journal DAR 256, 133 F.3d 726 (1998)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A defendant's 'cultural assimilation' into the United States is a permissible factor for a sentencing court to consider as a basis for a downward departure from the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, particularly when a defendant's circumstances are so unusual as to fall outside the 'heartland' of typical cases for the offense.
Facts:
- Michael Devon Lipman, a Jamaican citizen, was brought to the United States by his mother at the age of twelve.
- Lipman legally resided in the U.S. for an uninterrupted period of twenty-three years, attended New York public schools, and married a U.S. citizen.
- He fathered seven U.S.-born children, and his entire immediate family, including his mother, siblings, and wife, are U.S. citizens residing in the country.
- In 1994, Lipman was deported to Jamaica after being convicted of numerous felonies, including unlawful imprisonment, sexual abuse, and attempted robbery.
- On August 2, 1996, Lipman reentered the United States without authorization.
- Ten days after his reentry, Lipman was arrested in Los Angeles for possession and transportation of approximately thirty-nine pounds of marijuana.
Procedural Posture:
- A federal grand jury indicted Michael Devon Lipman on one count of illegal reentry after being deported for a felony conviction.
- Lipman pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court, the court of first instance.
- At his sentencing hearing, Lipman moved for a downward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines based on his 'cultural assimilation' into the United States.
- The district court denied the motion for a downward departure and sentenced Lipman to twenty-one months in prison.
- Lipman, as the appellant, appealed his sentence to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, arguing the district court erred by not recognizing its authority to depart on this basis.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a district court have the authority to grant a downward departure from the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines on the basis of a defendant's 'cultural assimilation' into American society?
Opinions:
Majority - Pregerson, J.
Yes, a sentencing court has the authority under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines to depart downward on the basis of a defendant's cultural assimilation. The Sentencing Commission has not proscribed cultural assimilation as a basis for departure, so courts are permitted to consider it. This factor is distinguishable from the prohibited ground of 'future deportation' because cultural assimilation can speak to an offender's character and motives for the offense, such as familial ties, rather than just their status as an alien. A court may depart on this basis if it finds the defendant’s circumstances are so unusual that they remove the case from the 'heartland' of typical cases envisioned by the relevant sentencing guideline, similar to how 'family ties' can warrant a departure in extraordinary circumstances.
Analysis:
This decision establishes 'cultural assimilation' as a cognizable, though discretionary, ground for a downward sentencing departure, particularly in illegal reentry cases. It provides a new avenue for defendants with deep and long-standing ties to the United States to argue for leniency by framing their life circumstances as falling outside the 'heartland' of typical cases. The ruling distinguishes between a defendant's mere status as a deportable alien and the substantive, mitigating nature of their life-long ties to the U.S. While the court affirmed that the ultimate decision to depart remains a non-reviewable exercise of discretion, it confirmed that judges are not legally barred from considering such an argument.
