Order Reducing Defendant's Prison Term Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) Based on USSG Amend. 782

VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court upon the filing of Defendant's Motion for Sentence Reduction Based on Amendment 782. (Doc. # 353). The United States Probation Office filed its Amendment 782 Memorandum on October 26, 2016. (Doc. # 396). The October 26, 2016, Amendment 782 Memorandum indicates that Defendant is eligible for a sentence reduction. (Id.). Specifically, the Amendment 782 Memorandum indicates that Defendant is eligible for a 2-level reduction as to the sentence imposed for Count II that results in an offense level of 33, criminal history category of I, with a guideline range of 135 to 168 months as to Count II. (Id.). With regards to the sentence imposed for Count IX, Defendant's sentence remains unchanged. The Memorandum further indicates that, at the time of original sentencing, the Court varied downward by 24 months, resulting in the imposed 144 months as to Count II in light of Defendant's lack of a criminal records, his immediate cooperation with the Government, and after consideration of the § 3553 factors. Thus, Defendant's total sentence, after taking into consideration the reduction pursuant to Amendment 782, is 195 months' (135 months as to Count II and 60 months as to Count IX, consecutive) imprisonment.

The Court agrees that Defendant is eligible for a reduction and, pursuant to its discretionary authority under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and USSG § 1B1.10, grants a sentence reduction consistent with the October 26, 2016, Amendment 782 Memorandum. Having reviewed the facts in both the original presentence investigation report and the October 26, 2016, Memorandum from the United States Probation Office in light of the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the need to consider the nature and seriousness of any danger posed by a reduction, see USSG § 1B1.10, comment (n.1(B)(ii)), and the pending Motion, the Court finds that a reduction of 9 months as to Count II's sentence is warranted.

Thus:

DONE and ORDERED.