USA v. Banks, 1:15-cr-00032-MOC. (2017)
Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20171122g24
Visitors: 18
Filed: Nov. 21, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 21, 2017
Summary: ORDER MAX O. COGBURN, JR. , District Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court on the fourth letter (#40) from defendant asking this court to reduce her sentence or other relief. See Letters (#s 31, 35, & 37). As this Court advised defendant in its Orders (#s 32 & 38), this Court has absolutely no authority to reduce her sentence. This time, defendant has enclosed a picture of herself and copies of her recently received diploma as well as copies of certificates obtained based on other acc
Summary: ORDER MAX O. COGBURN, JR. , District Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court on the fourth letter (#40) from defendant asking this court to reduce her sentence or other relief. See Letters (#s 31, 35, & 37). As this Court advised defendant in its Orders (#s 32 & 38), this Court has absolutely no authority to reduce her sentence. This time, defendant has enclosed a picture of herself and copies of her recently received diploma as well as copies of certificates obtained based on other acco..
More
ORDER
MAX O. COGBURN, JR., District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the fourth letter (#40) from defendant asking this court to reduce her sentence or other relief. See Letters (#s 31, 35, & 37). As this Court advised defendant in its Orders (#s 32 & 38), this Court has absolutely no authority to reduce her sentence.
This time, defendant has enclosed a picture of herself and copies of her recently received diploma as well as copies of certificates obtained based on other accomplishments while incarcerated. She further states that "I was told I had to go through education and present my diploma to my sentencing judge for reconsideration." Letter (#40) at 3-4. Defendant has, unfortunately, again received incorrect advice from someone as the law does not allow any court to reduce a sentence based on an incarcerated person's motion regardless of their achievements while in prison. Absent a showing of clear error under Rule 35(a), which has a very limited scope and is inapplicable in this case where the court granted a below-guidelines variance, the only methods for modifying or correcting a previously imposed Judgment that has become final are by a government filed motion under Rule 35(b) or a motion sponsored by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons under Section 3582(c).
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that to the extent defendant seeks relief in her letter (#40), such relief is denied.
Source: Leagle
