Filed: Aug. 23, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 10-1439 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Leroy Laron Eason, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: August 23, 2010 Filed: August 23, 2010 _ Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Federal inmate Leroy Eason appeals the district court’s1 order denying his motion to compel the government to move for a post-co
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 10-1439 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Leroy Laron Eason, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: August 23, 2010 Filed: August 23, 2010 _ Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Federal inmate Leroy Eason appeals the district court’s1 order denying his motion to compel the government to move for a post-con..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 10-1439
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Eastern District of Missouri.
Leroy Laron Eason, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: August 23, 2010
Filed: August 23, 2010
___________
Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Federal inmate Leroy Eason appeals the district court’s1 order denying his
motion to compel the government to move for a post-conviction sentence reduction.
After careful review, we find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying
Eason’s motion, because he did not meet his burden of showing that the government’s
refusal to move for a sentence reduction was premised on an unconstitutional motive
1
The Honorable Charles A. Shaw, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
or was not rationally related to a legitimate government end. See United States v.
Marks,
244 F.3d 971, 975 (8th Cir. 2001).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
______________________________
-2-