Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Lee, 3:18-CR-00212-RJC-DSC. (2020)

Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina Number: infdco20200117948 Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 14, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 14, 2020
Summary: ORDER ROBERT J. CONRAD, JR. , District Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court upon motion of the defendant to correct his sentence pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(a). (Doc. No. 32). Rule 35(a) allows a court to correct a sentence for arithmetical, technical, or other clear error within fourteen days of sentencing. Here, the defendant challenges the Court's ruling on guideline issues following the presentation of evidence at his sentencing hearing. ( Id. at 6). Accordin
More

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon motion of the defendant to correct his sentence pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(a). (Doc. No. 32).

Rule 35(a) allows a court to correct a sentence for arithmetical, technical, or other clear error within fourteen days of sentencing. Here, the defendant challenges the Court's ruling on guideline issues following the presentation of evidence at his sentencing hearing. (Id. at 6). Accordingly, the defendant's claims are more properly raised on appeal following entry of the Judgment. See United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 235 (4th Cir. 2010) (Rule 35(a) does not authorize reconsideration of sentence).

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the defendant's motion is DISMISSED.

The Clerk is directed to certify copies of this order to the defendant, counsel for the defendant, and to the United States Attorney.

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