U.S. v. Phillips, 8:07-cr-535-T-26. (2019)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20190118820
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jan. 17, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 17, 2019
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. LAZZARA , District Judge . UPON FURTHER REFLECTION, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's pro se Motion for Sentence Reduction filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (Dkt. 47) is denied without prejudice. See United States v. Berry, 701 F.3d 374 , 377 (11 th Cir. 2012) (stating that "[t]he problem for [Defendant] is the [the Fair Sentencing Act] is not a guidelines amendment by the Sentencing Commission, but rather a statutory change by Congress, and thus
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. LAZZARA , District Judge . UPON FURTHER REFLECTION, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's pro se Motion for Sentence Reduction filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (Dkt. 47) is denied without prejudice. See United States v. Berry, 701 F.3d 374 , 377 (11 th Cir. 2012) (stating that "[t]he problem for [Defendant] is the [the Fair Sentencing Act] is not a guidelines amendment by the Sentencing Commission, but rather a statutory change by Congress, and thus i..
More
ORDER
RICHARD A. LAZZARA, District Judge.
UPON FURTHER REFLECTION, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's pro se Motion for Sentence Reduction filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (Dkt. 47) is denied without prejudice. See United States v. Berry, 701 F.3d 374, 377 (11th Cir. 2012) (stating that "[t]he problem for [Defendant] is the [the Fair Sentencing Act] is not a guidelines amendment by the Sentencing Commission, but rather a statutory change by Congress, and thus it does not serve as a basis for a § 3582(c)(2) sentence reduction in [Defendant's] case."). The Government's Motion for Extension of Time (Dkt. 49) is denied as moot. Additionally, the Government is relieved of the responsibility to respond to the motion.
DONE AND ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
