Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Jimenez, CR 11-00903-002 WHA. (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20150814782 Visitors: 15
Filed: Aug. 13, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 13, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SENTENCE REDUCTION UNDER U.S.S.G. 1B1.1(b) AND AMENDMENT 782 WILLIAM H. ALSUP , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties acting through their respective counsel, that: 1. Defendant is making an unopposed motion for modification of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). 2. Defendant's original guideline calculation was as follows: Total Offense Level: 26 Criminal History Category: I Guid
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SENTENCE REDUCTION UNDER U.S.S.G. § 1B1.1(b) AND AMENDMENT 782

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties acting through their respective counsel, that:

1. Defendant is making an unopposed motion for modification of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).

2. Defendant's original guideline calculation was as follows:

Total Offense Level: 26 Criminal History Category: I Guideline Range: 63 to 78 months Mandatory Minimum: None Applicable

3. Defendant was sentenced to 87 months imprisonment on May 8, 2012.

4. According to the Bureau of Prisons, Defendant's current projected release date is March 1, 2018.

5. Effective November 1, 2014, this Court may order a modification in defendant's sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c), USSG § 1B1.10(b)(1), and Amendment 782, to the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual.

6. Defendant's revised guideline calculation is as follows:

Total Offense Level: 24 Criminal History Category: I Guideline Range: 51 to 63 months Mandatory Minimum: None applicable

7. The parties have no reason to dispute the Sentence Reduction Investigation Report submitted to the Court by the Probation Office.

8. Based upon the foregoing, the parties hereby stipulate that the Court may enter an order reducing Defendant's total term of custody to 63 months, effective November 1, 2015.

9. The parties further stipulate that all other aspects of the original judgment order including the length of term of supervised release, all conditions of supervision, fines, restitution, and special assessment remain as previously imposed.

10. Defendant stipulates that he waives and does not request a hearing in this matter pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 43, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), and United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).

11. Defendant waives his right to appeal the district court's sentence.

12. Accordingly, the parties agree that an amended judgment in accordance with this stipulation may be entered by the Court in pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) and USSG § 1B1.10(b)(1), Amendment 782 of the Sentencing Guidelines Manual. A Sentencing Reduction Investigation Report and a proposed amended judgment will be submitted to the Court.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

August 12, 2015 /s/ J. Douglas Wilson _________________ ___________________________ DATED MELINDA L. HAAG United States Attorney J. DOUGLAS WILSON Assistant United States Attorney

[PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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