U.S. v. JONES, 02-CR-30145-WDS. (2012)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20120405b17
Visitors: 23
Filed: Apr. 04, 2012
Latest Update: Apr. 04, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM & ORDER WILLIAM D. STIEHL, District Judge. Before the Court is defendant's motion for retroactive application of the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines (Doc. 261) and his motion to substitute attorney (Doc. 267). Pursuant to Administrative Order 102 the Court appointed the Office of the Federal Public Defender to represent the defendant on his motion for retroactive application and sentence reduction. The case was assigned to Assistant Federal Public Defender Renee Schooley who conclu
Summary: MEMORANDUM & ORDER WILLIAM D. STIEHL, District Judge. Before the Court is defendant's motion for retroactive application of the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines (Doc. 261) and his motion to substitute attorney (Doc. 267). Pursuant to Administrative Order 102 the Court appointed the Office of the Federal Public Defender to represent the defendant on his motion for retroactive application and sentence reduction. The case was assigned to Assistant Federal Public Defender Renee Schooley who conclud..
More
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
WILLIAM D. STIEHL, District Judge.
Before the Court is defendant's motion for retroactive application of the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines (Doc. 261) and his motion to substitute attorney (Doc. 267).
Pursuant to Administrative Order 102 the Court appointed the Office of the Federal Public Defender to represent the defendant on his motion for retroactive application and sentence reduction. The case was assigned to Assistant Federal Public Defender Renee Schooley who concluded that the defendant did not qualify for a reduction, and therefore did not file a supplement to defendant's motion.
The Seventh Circuit has held that "the amendments [to the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines for crack cocaine offenses] leave the career-offender guideline unchanged" United States v. Griffin, 652 F.3d 793, 803 (7th Cir. 2011). A review of the record reveals that the defendant was sentenced as a career offender, so the relief which the defendant seeks is not available to him. Therefore, the Court FINDS that the defendant is ineligible for a reduction under any of the amendments to the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines for crack cocaine offenses. Accordingly, the Court DENIES his motion for retroactive application of the sentencing guidelines, and further, DENIES as moot his motion for substitution of attorney.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
