Unpublished Disposition, 904 F.2d 41 (9th Cir. 1990)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Gutierrez appeals his sentence imposed under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines) for rescue of seized property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2233. Gutierrez contends that the district court erred by upwardly departing from the Guidelines. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

When departing from the Guidelines, the district court must state its reasons for departure, identify the specific aggravating or mitigating circumstance, and make a clear finding that the Sentencing Commission did not adequately consider that circumstance. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c); United States v. Lira-Barraza, 897 F.2d 981, 983 (9th Cir. 1989).

Although Gutierrez contends that the district court improperly relied on his prior criminal history, we conclude that, in justifying the upward departure, the district court relied only on circumstances arising after Gutierrez attempted to repossess his car. Gutierrez engaged in a high speed chase, running a roadblock that police set up to stop him, covering at least three freeways and lasting over an hour.

In support of its decision to depart, the district court stated that Gutierrez's high speed chase endangered the public safety. It said: "In any event, none of these factors concerning the conduct after he went back to the Customs impound lot and tried to rescue his own impounded car have been taken into account in the computation of the guidelines, and the Court does feel that it is a case which warrants, if not requires, substantial departure."

We have held that a high speed chase justifies departure on the ground that it endangers public safety. United States v. Rodriguez-Castro, No. 89-50093, slip op. 4567, 4572-73 (9th Cir. May 10, 1990). Thus, the district court properly departed on this basis. Moreover, we find that the eighteen-month sentence was reasonable under the circumstances. See United States v. Ramirez-De Rosas, 873 F.2d 1177, 1180 (9th Cir. 1989). Therefore, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.