Unpublished Disposition, 933 F.2d 1017 (9th Cir. 1991)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 933 F.2d 1017 (9th Cir. 1991)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Robert Michael KOUNS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 90-35714.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 9, 1991.* Decided May 13, 1991.

Before JAMES R. BROWNING, GOODWIN and POOLE, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Robert Michael Kouns, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Kouns contends that his sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. We review de novo, United States v. Angelone, 894 F.2d 1129, 1130 (9th Cir. 1990), and we affirm.

Kouns pleaded guilty to one count of armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and (d). The sentencing range for this offense is 33-41 months. The district court sentenced Kouns to 41 months of imprisonment to be followed by 5 years of supervised release. In his section 2255 motion, Kouns alleged that his sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment because (1) it exceeds the guideline range, (2) the district court did not grant him a downward departure based on his drug and alcohol dependency, and (3) his sentence is disproportionate to his offense.

Kouns's first contention is erroneous because his 41-month sentence is within the guideline range. Moreover, this court does not have jurisdiction to review the district court's refusal to grant a downward departure. See United States v. Morales, 898 F.2d 99, 100 (9th Cir. 1990). Finally, the 41-month sentence is not disproportionate to the offense of armed bank robbery. See United States v. Yarbrough, 852 F.2d 1522, 1545-46 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 866 (1988). Accordingly, the district court properly dismissed Kouns's section 2255 motion.

AFFIRMED.

 *

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

 **

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

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.