## Facts

- The United States prosecuted Trujillo for second-degree murder under 18 U.S.C. § 1111 for the shooting death of Brian Lester Sam.
- The government accepted Trujillo’s guilty plea to the lesser-included offense of manslaughter under 18 U.S.C. § 1112.
- Trujillo sought a downward departure from the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range, arguing that he had no criminal record and that the victim had provoked him.
- Taking Trujillo’s account as true, Sam was intoxicated, started a fight with Trujillo, and poked Trujillo with an object Trujillo mistakenly believed was a knife.
- Trujillo believed, based on Sam’s remarks, that Sam intended to retrieve a gun from Trujillo’s bedroom.
- Trujillo went to the bedroom, retrieved a firearm, and aimed it at Sam, who followed him into the bedroom.
- Sam cursed and taunted Trujillo and moved toward him in a menacing way.
- Trujillo said he believed he was in danger; he stepped back and fired once, killing Sam.
- The government characterized Trujillo’s account as establishing, at most, imperfect self-defense.
- The government opposed a reduced sentence, arguing Trujillo already received credit for Sam’s provocation because the plea agreement reduced the charge from murder to manslaughter, and that an additional reduction would give Trujillo credit twice for the same conduct.

## Issues

1. Whether the court should grant a downward departure based on the victim’s provocation and Trujillo’s claimed self-defensive motivation when Trujillo had already been permitted to plead to manslaughter instead of second-degree murder.
2. Whether Trujillo’s lack of a prior criminal record justified a downward departure beyond the effect of the Guidelines’ criminal history calculation.

## Decision

- The court denied Trujillo’s request for a downward departure from the advisory Guidelines range.
- The court accepted the government’s position that the mitigating force of provocation and imperfect self-defense had already been reflected in the plea to manslaughter rather than prosecution and conviction for second-degree murder.
- The court declined to reduce the sentence again based on the same circumstances, reasoning that doing so would effectively credit Trujillo twice for the same facts.
- The court also declined to reduce the sentence based solely on Trujillo’s lack of criminal history beyond what the Guidelines already account for through the criminal history category.

## Legal Principles

- A district court has discretion at sentencing to deny a requested downward departure when the asserted mitigating circumstances are already accounted for by the offense of conviction and the advisory Guidelines calculation.
- When a defendant receives a significant reduction in exposure by pleading to a lesser-included offense that reflects the defendant’s mitigation theory (such as provocation or imperfect self-defense), the court may treat an additional reduction for the same facts as duplicative.
- A defendant’s absence of prior convictions is ordinarily captured by the Guidelines’ criminal history score and does not, by itself, require an additional downward departure.

## Conclusion

In United States v. Trujillo, 2010 WL 5476756 (2010), the District of New Mexico addressed a defendant’s request for a downward departure after he pleaded guilty to federal manslaughter in connection with a shooting death that he attributed to provocation and fear. The court denied the request, concluding that the plea to manslaughter already accounted for the claimed mitigation and that Trujillo’s clean record was already reflected in the Guidelines’ criminal history treatment.
