From our private database of 37,500+ case briefs...
United States v. Brooke
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
308 F.3d 17 (2002)
At age 70, Juan Brooke (defendant) was convicted in federal court of possessing cocaine with an intent to distribute it. After five years in prison, Brooke was allowed out on supervised release. At age 78, while still on supervised release, Brooke was convicted in a District of Columbia superior court of new cocaine-related charges. Brooke served six months in prison for that conviction before being released on probation. Several years later, while still on probation, Brooke was arrested for distributing significant amounts of cocaine out of his apartment. As part of a plea agreement, federal prosecutors declined to charge Brooke with distributing cocaine and instead charged him with the lesser offense of conspiracy to distribute cocaine. This conspiracy offense carried a maximum possible sentence of 60 months, or five years, in prison. At Brooke’s sentencing, Brooke presented evidence that he (1) was 82 years old and (2) had several physical issues, including respiratory problems, cardiac concerns, arthritis, and mobility issues in his knees and hands. Brooke asked the court to apply two potential downward departures to reduce his prison sentence or convert the sentence to home detention. One requested departure was based on a defendant’s age, and the other was based on a defendant’s physical condition. The district court declined to apply either downward departure. Although the court found that Brooke was elderly and had physical issues, it also found that (1) Brooke’s history showed that his advanced age did not make him less of a drug-dealing threat, (2) Brooke’s physical issues were not extraordinary, and (3) home confinement would not be as effective as prison because Brooke had a history of dealing drugs out of his home. Brooke received the full 60-month sentence. Brooke appealed, arguing that the district court had misunderstood how the downward departures worked and that the court should have applied the departures to Brooke’s sentence.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Garland, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 631,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 631,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 37,500 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.