Is a sentence for a convicted drug dealer unconstitutional because he exercised his right to go to trial?

Fischer argues that his sentence was unconstitutional in that he received a disparate sentence from that of his coconspirators because he exercised his right to trial. "Whether [a] harsher sentence[ ] [was] imposed as a punishment for a defendant's assertion of his right to trial is a mixed question of law and fact." United States v. Morris, 827 F.2d 1348, 1352 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1017 (1988). It is undeniable that Fischer received a harsher sentence after his conviction than he would have received under the offered plea bargain. However, "the mere imposition of a heavier sentence after a defendant voluntarily rejects a plea bargain does not, without more, invalidate the sentence." Id. The sentencing court was scrupulous in avoiding giving Fischer a stiffer sentence because he went to trial, to the extent that it gave Fischer a two point reduction for acceptance of responsibility, normally reserved for defendants who plead guilty.