U.S. v. RIOS-HERNANDEZ, 3:93-cr-00091-HDM-VPC. (2013)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20130828c63
Visitors: 23
Filed: Aug. 27, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 27, 2013
Summary: ORDER HOWARD D. McKIBBEN, District Judge. Defendant has filed a "Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(2) and United States Sentencing Guidelines 1B1.10" (#215). Defendant argues that he is entitled to a reduction of his sentence based on Amendments 505 and 219 1 to the United States Sentencing Guideline. Defendant has previously moved for a reduction of sentence based on the retroactive application of Amendment 505. ( See Doc. #211). On April 26, 2010, the court deni
Summary: ORDER HOWARD D. McKIBBEN, District Judge. Defendant has filed a "Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(2) and United States Sentencing Guidelines 1B1.10" (#215). Defendant argues that he is entitled to a reduction of his sentence based on Amendments 505 and 219 1 to the United States Sentencing Guideline. Defendant has previously moved for a reduction of sentence based on the retroactive application of Amendment 505. ( See Doc. #211). On April 26, 2010, the court denie..
More
ORDER
HOWARD D. McKIBBEN, District Judge.
Defendant has filed a "Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(2) and United States Sentencing Guidelines § 1B1.10" (#215). Defendant argues that he is entitled to a reduction of his sentence based on Amendments 505 and 2191 to the United States Sentencing Guideline.
Defendant has previously moved for a reduction of sentence based on the retroactive application of Amendment 505. (See Doc. #211). On April 26, 2010, the court denied the defendant's motion on the grounds that Amendment 505 did not alter the base offense level applicable to defendant's offense. (See Doc. #214). Defendant did not appeal the court's order.
Defendant's latest motion raises no new basis for relief and instead asserts the identical argument already rejected by the court. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the court's order dated April 26, 2010, the defendant's motion for a sentence reduction (#215) based on Amendment 505 is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Defendant's citation to Amendment 219 appears to be in error, as that Amendment has no application in this case. The court believes defendant intended to cite Amendment 536, which made Amendment 505 retroactively applicable for purposes of relief under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10.
Source: Leagle
