Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Armendariz Alexander, 07-3393 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 07-3393 Visitors: 11
Filed: Feb. 27, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 07-3393 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Armendariz Alexander, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: February 18, 2009 Filed: February 27, 2009 _ Before RILEY, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Armendariz Alexander (Alexander) appeals the district court’s1 denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence
More
                     United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   ___________

                                   No. 07-3393
                                   ___________

United States of America,               *
                                        *
             Appellee,                  *
                                        * Appeal from the United States
      v.                                * District Court for the
                                        * Eastern District of Missouri.
Armendariz Alexander,                   *
                                        * [UNPUBLISHED]
             Appellant.                 *
                                   ___________

                             Submitted: February 18, 2009
                                Filed: February 27, 2009
                                 ___________

Before RILEY, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
                            ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Armendariz Alexander (Alexander) appeals the district court’s1 denial of his 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction. Upon reviewing the record and
counsel’s brief, we conclude the district court did not err in denying Alexander’s
motion. See United States v. Peveler, 
359 F.3d 369
, 373 (6th Cir. 2004) (stating a
decision to deny a motion to modify under § 3582 is reviewed for abuse of discretion,
but to the extent a defendant’s arguments rest on a legal interpretation of various
Sentencing Guidelines, the interpretation of those Guidelines is a question of law

      1
       The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Sr., United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Missouri, now retired.
reviewed de novo); United States v. Friend, 
303 F.3d 921
, 922 (8th Cir. 2002) (per
curiam) (proclaiming Guidelines Amendment 599 only applies to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)
convictions).

      We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.
                     ______________________________




                                       -2-

Source:  CourtListener

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