U.S. v. ANNIS, CR04-2032-LRR. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. Iowa
Number: infdco20150701d73
Visitors: 13
Filed: Jun. 30, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 30, 2015
Summary: ORDER LINDA R. READE , Chief District Judge . This matter comes before the court on the defendant's motion to reconsider (docket no. 77). The defendant filed such motion on May 20, 2015. The defendant states nothing that leads the court to a different determination. The court previously granted the defendant the maximum reduction permitted under the law. Before doing so, the court correctly calculated the amended guideline range by utilizing the drug table under USSG 2D1.1(c) to determine
Summary: ORDER LINDA R. READE , Chief District Judge . This matter comes before the court on the defendant's motion to reconsider (docket no. 77). The defendant filed such motion on May 20, 2015. The defendant states nothing that leads the court to a different determination. The court previously granted the defendant the maximum reduction permitted under the law. Before doing so, the court correctly calculated the amended guideline range by utilizing the drug table under USSG 2D1.1(c) to determine ..
More
ORDER
LINDA R. READE, Chief District Judge.
This matter comes before the court on the defendant's motion to reconsider (docket no. 77). The defendant filed such motion on May 20, 2015. The defendant states nothing that leads the court to a different determination. The court previously granted the defendant the maximum reduction permitted under the law. Before doing so, the court correctly calculated the amended guideline range by utilizing the drug table under USSG § 2D1.1(c) to determine the defendant's base offense level, that is, 30, adding two levels pursuant to USSG § 2D1.1(b) and adding one level pursuant to USSG § 3D1.4 because the total adjusted offense level for count 4 was 24 after four levels were added pursuant to USSG § 2K2.1(b)(5) and 24 is eight levels less serious than the highest offense level, that is, 32. Moreover, even if the court grouped count 1 and count 4 pursuant to USSG § 3D1.2(c), 210 months imprisonment is appropriate in light of the defendant's history and characteristics, which includes but is not limited to his post-sentencing conduct. Because the court stands by its earlier decision, the defendant's motion to reconsider (docket no. 77) is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
