Filed: Mar. 28, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2016
Summary: Opinion and Order CAMERON McGOWAN CURRIE , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the court pursuant to Defendant's pro se motion to reduce sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582 (c)(2) and USSC Amendment 782. ECF No. 4027. As the court has previously denied a motion by Defendant for relief under this statute (ECF Nos. 3953, 3989), the court construes this filing as a motion for reconsideration. Pursuant to United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233 , 236 (4th Cir. 2010), "the clear
Summary: Opinion and Order CAMERON McGOWAN CURRIE , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the court pursuant to Defendant's pro se motion to reduce sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582 (c)(2) and USSC Amendment 782. ECF No. 4027. As the court has previously denied a motion by Defendant for relief under this statute (ECF Nos. 3953, 3989), the court construes this filing as a motion for reconsideration. Pursuant to United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233 , 236 (4th Cir. 2010), "the clear ..
More
Opinion and Order
CAMERON McGOWAN CURRIE, Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the court pursuant to Defendant's pro se motion to reduce sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) and USSC Amendment 782. ECF No. 4027. As the court has previously denied a motion by Defendant for relief under this statute (ECF Nos. 3953, 3989), the court construes this filing as a motion for reconsideration.
Pursuant to United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 236 (4th Cir. 2010), "the clear intent of § 3582 is to constrain postjudgment sentence modifications . . . ." Section § 3582(c) "gives a district court one—and only one—opportunity to apply the retroactive amendments and modify the sentence." United States v. Mann, 435 F. App'x 254, 254 (2011) (citing Goodwyn, 596 F.3d at 236); see also United States v. Redd, 630 F.3d 649, 651 (7th Cir. 2011). Accordingly, this court is without jurisdiction to entertain Defendant's motion for relief under § 3582(c).
Even if this court had jurisdiction to entertain this motion, Defendant is not entitled to relief under Amendment 782 because the new guideline range did not lower Defendant's current sentence, as stated in the denial of Defendant's motion. See Order, ECF No. 3989.
Therefore, Defendant's motion is dismissed as this court is without jurisdiction to consider it.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
