Filed: May 02, 2016
Latest Update: May 02, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT B. LYNN WINMILL , Chief District Judge . INTRODUCTION The Court has before it Defendant's Motion to Amend the Judgment to Credit Time Served (Dkt. 52). For the reasons explained below, the Court will deny the motion. DISCUSSION On July 24, 2014, the Court sentenced Defendant Joseph Raymond Haycock to a 40-month term of imprisonment. At the time of sentencing, Haycock had spent approximately eight months in federal custody. Th
Summary: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT B. LYNN WINMILL , Chief District Judge . INTRODUCTION The Court has before it Defendant's Motion to Amend the Judgment to Credit Time Served (Dkt. 52). For the reasons explained below, the Court will deny the motion. DISCUSSION On July 24, 2014, the Court sentenced Defendant Joseph Raymond Haycock to a 40-month term of imprisonment. At the time of sentencing, Haycock had spent approximately eight months in federal custody. The..
More
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT
B. LYNN WINMILL, Chief District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
The Court has before it Defendant's Motion to Amend the Judgment to Credit Time Served (Dkt. 52). For the reasons explained below, the Court will deny the motion.
DISCUSSION
On July 24, 2014, the Court sentenced Defendant Joseph Raymond Haycock to a 40-month term of imprisonment. At the time of sentencing, Haycock had spent approximately eight months in federal custody. The Court recommended to the Bureau of Prisons that Haycock receive credit for all time already spent in federal custody. Transcript 65:10-11, Dkt. 48. The Bureau of Prisons, however, has not given Haycock credit for the eight months he spent in federal custody before being sentenced. Accordingly, Haycock moves for the Court to amend the judgment by imposing a sentence that credits his eight months spent in federal custody before he was sentenced.
The Court must deny Haycock's motion because it lacks jurisdiction to modify his term of imprisonment. The Court has jurisdiction to modify a term of imprisonment after it has been imposed in three instances, none of which apply in this case. First, in narrow circumstances, the Court may reduce the term of imprisonment upon motion of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Second, the Court may reduce the term of imprisonment if it is based on a sentencing range the Sentencing Commission has lowered since the time of sentencing. Id. § 3582(c)(2). Third, the Court may correct a term of imprisonment within 14 days after sentencing if the Court finds an arithmetical, technical, or other clear error. Id. § 3582(c)(1)(B); Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a).
These options do not apply in this case. First, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons has not filed a motion to reduce Haycock's term of imprisonment. Second, the Sentencing Commission has not lowered the applicable sentencing range. Third, more than 14 days have passed since the Court imposed Haycock's sentence. Thus, because the Court lacks jurisdiction to amend the judgment by modifying Haycock's term of imprisonment, the Court will deny Haycock's motion.
ORDER
Defendant's Motion to Amend the Judgment (Dkt. 52) is DENIED.
