Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Barber, 2:17-00189-KD-B. (2019)

Court: District Court, S.D. Alabama Number: infdco20190624730 Visitors: 6
Filed: Jun. 20, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 20, 2019
Summary: ORDER KRISTI K. DuBOSE , Chief District Judge . This action is before the Court on defendant Gerald Barber's "Motion for Sentence Modification under 18 U.S.C. 3582 (H.R. 5682) First Step Act and Sentencing Reform Corrections Act" (doc. 116). Barber argues that he is entitled to a reduced sentence "based on the retroactivity provision of the First Step Act of 2018" (doc. 116, p. 2). Barber "believes he was sentenced under the 100 to 1 former cocaine base ("crack") ratio in U.S.S.G. 2D1.
More

ORDER

This action is before the Court on defendant Gerald Barber's "Motion for Sentence Modification under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (H.R. 5682) First Step Act and Sentencing Reform Corrections Act" (doc. 116). Barber argues that he is entitled to a reduced sentence "based on the retroactivity provision of the First Step Act of 2018" (doc. 116, p. 2). Barber "believes he was sentenced under the 100 to 1 former cocaine base ("crack") ratio in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1" (Id.).1

Section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018 provides for retroactive application of Sections 2 and 3 of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 in certain cases. Sections 2 and 3 increased the quantity of crack cocaine necessary to impose certain statutory mandatory minimum sentences. However, Section 404(c) states that "[n]o court shall entertain a motion made under this section to reduce a sentence if the sentence was previously imposed . . . in accordance with the amendments made by sections 2 and 3 of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010[.]" Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194 (2018) (emphasis added).

The Fair Sentencing Act became effective August 3, 2010. Barber's sentence was imposed April 23, 2018 (doc. 93). Therefore, the Fair Sentencing Act was in effect at the time of his sentencing and his sentence was imposed "in accordance with the amendments made by sections 2 and 3 of Fair Sentencing Act." Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194 (2018).

Accordingly, because Congress instructs that "[n]o Court shall entertain a motion" to reduce a sentence in this procedural posture, Barber's motion is DENIED.

DONE and ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. In support of his motion, Barber provides certificates of completion for a self-help book study program, drug abuse education course, and anger management course as well as his inmate program review to show his good conduct while incarcerated (doc. 116, p. 5-10).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer