Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. McCULLOUGH, 1:08-cr-133. (2012)

Court: District Court, W.D. Michigan Number: infdco20120127j21 Visitors: 13
Filed: Jan. 26, 2012
Latest Update: Jan. 26, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JANET T. NEFF, District Judge. Defendant Adriel McCullough has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (Dkt 163) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) based on the modification of the Drug Quantity Table with respect to cocaine base (crack cocaine). Section 3582(c)(2) permits a court to reduce the term of imprisonment of a defendant who has been sentenced based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. 18
More

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

JANET T. NEFF, District Judge.

Defendant Adriel McCullough has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (Dkt 163) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(2) based on the modification of the Drug Quantity Table with respect to cocaine base (crack cocaine).

Section 3582(c)(2) permits a court to reduce the term of imprisonment of a defendant who has been sentenced based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Amendment 750 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines modified U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, the Drug Quantity Table with regard to cocaine base (crack cocaine), and U.S.S.G. § 2D2.1(b). These modifications were made retroactive effective November 1, 2011. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c).

The defendant is ineligible for consideration of modification of sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) because at the time of original sentencing, the Court applied a base offense level of 26 for the 113.4 grams of cocaine base accountable to the defendant. The Court based the offense level on the application of a 20 to 1 ratio of powder to crack. Application of the retroactive amendment would require a base offense level of 28; therefore the amendment would not result in a lower sentence.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion for modification of sentence (Dkt 163) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's request for court appointed counsel is also DENIED.

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