Unpublished Disposition, 921 F.2d 281 (9th Cir. 1990)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 921 F.2d 281 (9th Cir. 1990)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Jeffrey Brian GREENE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 90-30205.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 18, 1990.* Decided Dec. 20, 1990.

Before GOODWIN, Chief Judge, and SCHROEDER and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Jeffrey Greene appeals his sentence, imposed under the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines"), following his guilty plea to one count of forcible rape in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 2241(a). Greene contends that the district court imposed an unreasonably long sentence. Specifically, he contends that the district court should have departed downward from the sentencing range established by the Guidelines because of Greene's mental condition at the time of the offense and because his criminal history was over-represented in the Guidelines calculations.

We lack jurisdiction to review the district court's discretionary decision not to depart downward from the Guidelines range. See United States v. Sanchez, 914 F.2d 1355, 1363-64 (9th Cir. 1990); United States v. Morales, 898 F.2d 99, 102-03 (9th Cir. 1990).

Here, Greene received the minimum 151-month sentence under the applicable Guideline range, well below the statutory maximum of life imprisonment. The district court relied in part on Greene's criminal history when setting the sentence at the low end of the range, and found that there were no mitigating factors warranting a departure. This finding is not subject to review on appeal. See Morales, 898 F.2d at 103.

DISMISSED.

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for disposition without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.