Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. BOLLES, 6:13-cr-305-Orl-37TBS. (2016)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20160822974 Visitors: 21
Filed: Aug. 19, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 19, 2016
Summary: ORDER ROY B. DALTON, Jr. , District Judge . This cause is before the Court on the following: 1. Defendant's Motion to Reduce Sentence or Amend Judgment and Committment [sic] Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. [ ] 3584(c) (Doc. 65), filed August 4, 2016; and 2. Government's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Reduce Sentence or Amend Judgment and Commitment Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3584(c) (Doc. 68), filed August 17, 2016. On October 2, 2014, a Delaware district court sentenced
More

ORDER

This cause is before the Court on the following:

1. Defendant's Motion to Reduce Sentence or Amend Judgment and Committment [sic] Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. [§] 3584(c) (Doc. 65), filed August 4, 2016; and 2. Government's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Reduce Sentence or Amend Judgment and Commitment Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3584(c) (Doc. 68), filed August 17, 2016.

On October 2, 2014, a Delaware district court sentenced Defendant to a term of sixty months' imprisonment ("Delaware Sentence") for unlawfully maintaining a premise for the purpose of manufacturing and distributing controlled substances. (See Doc. 55, p. 16.) On April 27, 2015, this Court also sentenced Defendant to a term of sixty months' imprisonment ("Federal Sentence") for similar offenses arising out of the same conduct that resulted in the Delaware Sentence. (Doc. 58; see also Doc. 59.) The Judgment states that the Federal Sentence "shall run concurrently with" the Delaware Sentence. (Doc. 59.)

Defendant now moves for a reduction of the Federal Sentence. (Doc. 65.) She contends that the Federal Sentence should conclude when the Delaware Sentence concludes pursuant to the Court's order that the sentences run concurrently. (Id.) Thus, she seeks a seven-month reduction of the Federal Sentence so that she serves an aggregate of sixty months' imprisonment. (Id.) The Government opposes the Motion (Doc. 68), and the Court disagrees with Defendant. Defendant's Federal Sentence began on April 27, 2015, and she must serve the entirety of that sentence. To the extent that Defendant argues that she is entitled to credit for time-served (see Doc. 65), the Court has already rejected that argument and upholds that decision today (see Doc. 62).

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to Reduce Sentence or Amend Judgment and Committment [sic] Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. [§] 3584(c) (Doc. 65) is DENIED.

DONE AND 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