ORDER

SUSAN C. BUCKLEW, District Judge.

This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Freddie Wilson's pro se Motion to Expand the Record to Include the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Granting Petitioner's Writ of Mandamus for the Addendum to the Petitioner's Presentence Investigation Report that Corresponds to 41 to 51 months of Imprisonment. (Doc. No. 161). Upon review, the motion is DENIED.

On July 11, 2013, a jury found Defendant guilty of (1) six counts of theft of government property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641 (Counts 1-6), (2) five counts of aggravated identity theft in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A (Counts 7-12), (3) one count of conducting an unlawful monetary transaction in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957 (Count 13), and (4) one count of obstruction of proper administration of law in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1505 (Count 14). (Dkt. 64). On October 8, 2013, Defendant was sentenced to 102 months' imprisonment followed by a three year period of supervised release. (Dkt. 83). At the October 8, 2013 sentencing, the Final Presentence Investigation Report utilized by the Court and the parties was dated September 19, 2013. (Doc. 160). The Amended Addendum to the Presentence Investigation Report was dated October 7, 2013. (Doc. 160-1).

Defendant asserts the probation department "once more inadvertently left out the October 8, 2013 addendum that corresponds to 41 to 51 months of imprisonment." (Doc. 161). The Court assumes Petitioner is referring to the October 7, 2013 Amended Addendum where the Probation Officer makes the following statement in reference to an objection by Defendant to the enhancement for 50 or more victims under USSG § 2B1.1(b)(2)(B):

(Dkt. 160-1). However, the Court did not rule in Defendant's favor as to this issue and found the four-level increase for 50 or more victims to be correct.

Defendant has been provided a copy of the October 7, 2013 Amended Addendum (See Dkt. 142 and April 12, 2016 email from Probation Officer David Tremmel to Deanna Gibson, Defendant's BOP case manager, attaching October 7, 2013 Amended Addendum, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1), as has the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals (See Dkt. 160).

Accordingly, Defendant's motion (Dkt. 161) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED.

Hello Ms. Gibson,

In the attached letter you forwarded to me from inmate Wilson, he is referring you to an initial disclosure of the presentence report dated 09/03/2013. As a standard part of the presentence process, the government objected to rough draft of the report asserting that Mr. Wilson defrauded 68 victims, and they requested that the enhancement of plus 4 for defrauding over 50 victims pursuant to USSG 2B1.1(b)(2)(B) be applied. After review of this objection by the government, the probation office agreed with their reasoning, and we redisclosed the final version of the PSR on September 19, 2013, applying this victim enhancement. In the attached addendum to that report, the probation office detailed for sentencing that the defendant objected to the Loss in the case and to the enhancement for defrauding 50 victims or more. According to the Statement of Reasons in the case, of which the BOP was provided a copy, at sentencing the Judge reduced the Loss value from $455,820 to $421,183, and she reduced the victim base from 68 to 52. Neither of these changes caused a change to the guideline calculations.

At sentencing, the Judge adopted the PSR and guideline calculations contained in that PSR dated September 19, 2013, of which both Mr. Wilson and the BOP have been provided a copy. Please find attached a copy of the Addendum to that PSR dated October 7, 2013. As part of the sentencing process, Mr. Wilson and his attorney received a copy of both the PSR dated September 19, 2013, and its Addendum dated October 7, 2013. After sentencing Mr. Wilson subsequently filed a motion with the Court to be provided another copy of this PSR. The Judge ordered probation to release another copy of the PSR to Mr. Wilson in response to his filing. Mr. Wilson subsequently called this officer to further request another copy of the Addendum dated October 7, 2013. This officer has since requested permission from the Judge to re-release a copy of this addendum to Mr. Wilson. The Judge has now authorized the probation office to do this. Please provide a copy of the attached Addendum to the PSR to Mr. Wilson pursuant to his request. Thank you for your help in this matter. Though there is no mechanism of which the probation office is aware for Mr. Wilson to challenge his sentence in the manner he is attempting, according to the mentioned documents and the Judgement in this case, Mr. Wilson's current sentence is correct. The probation office sees no validity to his challenge. Thank you.

Please see attached challenges with PSR for above mentioned inmate.