Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. CONRAD, CR-S-2:04-CR-00155-KJD-PAL. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20150617c75 Visitors: 11
Filed: Jun. 15, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 15, 2015
Summary: ORDER KENT J. DAWSON , District Judge . Presently before the Court is Defendant's Motion for a Sentence Reduction under Amendment 782 of 18 U.S.C. 3582(c) (#61). Also before the Court is Defense Counsel's Motion to Withdraw as Attorney (#64). Here, the Court finds that Defendant is ineligible for a sentence reduction pursuant to 3582(c), Amendment 782, and U.S.S.S.G. 1B1.10, effective November 1, 2014, because Defendant was sentenced as a Career Offender, pursuant to U.S.S.S.G. 4B1
More

ORDER

Presently before the Court is Defendant's Motion for a Sentence Reduction under Amendment 782 of 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (#61). Also before the Court is Defense Counsel's Motion to Withdraw as Attorney (#64). Here, the Court finds that Defendant is ineligible for a sentence reduction pursuant to § 3582(c), Amendment 782, and U.S.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, effective November 1, 2014, because Defendant was sentenced as a Career Offender, pursuant to U.S.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. Additionally, Defendant received a benefit of a downward variance and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment (188 months total term of custody) that is less than what the low end of his sentencing range would be under the revised Sentencing Guideline range (210 to 262 months). Therefore, the Court denies Defendant's motion for a sentence reduction. Furthermore, having read and considered the motion to withdraw, and good cause being found, it is granted.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for a Sentence Reduction under Amendment 782 of 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (#61) is DENIED;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defense Counsel's Motion to Withdraw as Attorney (#64) is GRANTED.

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