United States v. Chad Fouquette ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 99-1118
    ___________
    United States of America,                *
    *
    Appellee,                   * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    v.                                 * District of Minnesota.
    *
    Chad Gerard Fouquette,                   *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: January 4, 2000
    Filed: January 14, 2000
    ___________
    Before BOWMAN, FAGG, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Chad Gerard Fouquette pleaded guilty to assault with a dangerous weapon in
    violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 113
    (a)(3) (Supp. IV 1998). At sentencing, the District Court1
    denied Fouquette’s motion for a downward departure under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
    Manual § 5K2.13, p.s. (Nov. 1998), for diminished mental capacity and sentenced him
    to 33 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised release. Fouquette appeals, and we
    affirm.
    1
    The Honorable DAVID S. DOTY, United States District Judge for the District
    of Minnesota.
    We conclude Fouquette’s argument that the District Court applied the pre-1998
    version of section 5K2.13 is meritless, as the sentencing transcript reflects the Court
    quoted the pertinent portion of section 5K2.13 as it appeared in its amended form
    effective November 1, 1998. Fouquette also argues the District Court erroneously
    denied the diminished-capacity departure without considering the facts or
    circumstances of his offense or whether he presented a danger to the community at the
    time of his sentencing. Considering the District Court’s comments as a whole, see
    United States v. Knight, 
    96 F.3d 307
    , 311 (8th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 
    520 U.S. 1180
    (1997), we conclude that the court was aware of its authority to depart for diminished
    capacity and that the court’s exercise of discretion not to depart under the
    circumstances is unreviewable, see United States v. Jones, 
    145 F.3d 959
    , 965 (8th
    Cir.), cert. denied, 
    525 U.S. 988
     (1998).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 99-1118

Filed Date: 1/14/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021