factor warranted an additional one level under the circumstances. Thus, totaling the above factors, I concluded that an eight level reduction was appropriate. This brought defendant to an offense level of 21 and an imprisonment range of 46-57 months. Consistent with the recommendations of both parties, I re-sentenced defendant at the low end. All other conditions of the original judgment were re-imposed. 1 . Drug trafficking cases accounted for 22,882 of the 54,785 cases reported by the Commission in the FY 2001 statistics. Id. at 56. Courts granted 6023 substantial assistance departures in those 22,882 cases, but only 3346 substantial assistance departures in the 31,903 non-drug trafficking cases reported. Id.; see also id. at 80 (stating that substantial assistanc 5 (E.D.Wis.2002)
holding that the maximum revocation sentence is the top of the guidelines range recognizing a claim that the sentence exceeded the statutory maximum holding statutory error harmless where district court imposed the highest available sentence under guidelines range and considered sentencing to the statutory maximum holding that where the guideline range is higher than the statutory maximum sentence the court should depart from the lowest range that could support the statutory maximum holding that where the statutory mandatory minimum sentence is higher than the upper end of the guideline range the court departs from the statutory level ie the lowest offense level that could support the statutory minimum