U.S. v. MENDEZ, 8:10-cr-100-T-30MAP. (2017)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20170425980
Visitors: 25
Filed: Apr. 24, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 24, 2017
Summary: ORDER JAMES S. MOODY, Jr. , District Judge . THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Defendant's Motion of Reconsideration of Denial to Grant "Drugs Minor Two" Motion (Dkt. #410). Upon review, the Court determines the motion should be denied. Amendment 794 to the Sentencing Guidelines was merely a clarifying amendment, not a substantive one. It is retroactive only in the sense that it may be considered for a sentence on appeal, but does not give this Court jurisdiction to reconsider a
Summary: ORDER JAMES S. MOODY, Jr. , District Judge . THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Defendant's Motion of Reconsideration of Denial to Grant "Drugs Minor Two" Motion (Dkt. #410). Upon review, the Court determines the motion should be denied. Amendment 794 to the Sentencing Guidelines was merely a clarifying amendment, not a substantive one. It is retroactive only in the sense that it may be considered for a sentence on appeal, but does not give this Court jurisdiction to reconsider a p..
More
ORDER
JAMES S. MOODY, Jr., District Judge.
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Defendant's Motion of Reconsideration of Denial to Grant "Drugs Minor Two" Motion (Dkt. #410). Upon review, the Court determines the motion should be denied.
Amendment 794 to the Sentencing Guidelines was merely a clarifying amendment, not a substantive one. It is retroactive only in the sense that it may be considered for a sentence on appeal, but does not give this Court jurisdiction to reconsider a prior sentence. Trivino v. United States, No. 16-17002-E (11th Cir. April 12, 2017). See Burke v. United States, 152 F.3d 1329, 1332 (11th Cir. 1998) ("[A] claim that the sentence imposed is contrary to a post-sentencing clarifying amendment is a non-constitutional issue that does not provide a basis for collateral relief in the absence of a complete miscarriage of justice.").
Accordingly, it is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. Defendant's Motion of Reconsideration of Denial to Grant "Drugs Minor Two" Motion (Dkt. #410) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
