United States of America v. David L. Lucas, Appellant, 948 F.2d 782 (D.C. Cir. 1991)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - 948 F.2d 782 (D.C. Cir. 1991) Nov. 22, 1991




This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. The court has determined that the issues presented occasion no need for a published opinion. See D.C. Cir. Rule 14(c). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that appellant's conviction and sentence be affirmed. The district court did not err in rejecting appellant's claim that downward departure was warranted on the basis of his age, see States v. Shoupe, 929 F.2d 116, 120 (3d Cir. 1991); "deprived childhood," see United States v. Daly, 883 F.2d 313, 319 (4th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 110 S. Ct. 2622 (1990); and socio-economic status. See U.S.S.G. § 5H1.10. In addition, appellant has waived his argument that the Sentencing Commission failed to take adequate account of rehabilitation as a factor justifying departure by not having raised it in district court. See United States v. Thomas, 896 F.2d 589, 591 (D.C. Cir. 1990). In any case, that argument is without merit. Cf. United States v. Harrington, No. 90-3176, slip op. at 12-13 (D.C. Cir. October 25, 1991) (post-offense but pretrial rehabilitative effort may justify two-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility; further reduction might be in order "but only if the rehabilitation is 'so extraordinary as to suggest its presence to a degree not adequately taken into consideration by the acceptance of responsibility reduction." (quoting United States v. Sklar, 920 F.2d 107, 116 (1st Cir. 1990) (citation omitted)). Similarly, appellant's "basis and purpose" argument has not only been waived by appellant's failure to have raised it earlier, but also has been rejected in United States v. Lopez, 938 F.2d 1293 (D.C. Cir. 1991).

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. Rule 15.