Filed: Sep. 30, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 30, 2019
Summary: ORDER DUDLEY H. BOWEN , District Judge . On March 30, 2015, Defendant Andre Colita Wright was sentenced to serve 120 months in prison upon his plea of guilty to a conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine hydrochloride and cocaine base. Presently, Wright has filed a motion to amend his Presentence Investigation Report ("PSI") under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). In particular, Wright complains that he is ineligible for a sentence reduction upon completion of the Res
Summary: ORDER DUDLEY H. BOWEN , District Judge . On March 30, 2015, Defendant Andre Colita Wright was sentenced to serve 120 months in prison upon his plea of guilty to a conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine hydrochloride and cocaine base. Presently, Wright has filed a motion to amend his Presentence Investigation Report ("PSI") under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). In particular, Wright complains that he is ineligible for a sentence reduction upon completion of the Resi..
More
ORDER
DUDLEY H. BOWEN, District Judge.
On March 30, 2015, Defendant Andre Colita Wright was sentenced to serve 120 months in prison upon his plea of guilty to a conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine hydrochloride and cocaine base. Presently, Wright has filed a motion to amend his Presentence Investigation Report ("PSI") under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). In particular, Wright complains that he is ineligible for a sentence reduction upon completion of the Residential Drug Abuse Program ("RDAP") under 18 U.S.C. § 3621(e) and its attendant regulations because of the "mention of certain matters such firearm (sic), dangerous chemicals in some situations, and past convictions of certain type[s] as well as matters considered to be minor escapes ..." in his PSI. (Def.'s Mot., Doc. No. 487, at 2.)
First, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have no application to criminal proceedings. E.g., United States v. Mosavi, 138 F.3d 1365, 1366 (11th Cir. 1998) ("Rule 60(b) simply does not provide relief from judgment in a criminal case....").
Second, to the extent Wright seeks an amendment of his PSI, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 mandates that a party object to the inclusion of material in the PSI within 14 days of receipt, Rule 32(f)(1), or at the sentencing hearing prior to the imposition of sentence, Rule 32(i)(1)(D). Thus, Wright's objections at this late juncture are simply untimely.
Third, to the extent that Wright challenges his sentence (for instance, whether he is a career offender), such claim would be a challenge to the legality of his sentence which is only cognizable as a motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Because Wright has already filed a § 2255 motion, he must move the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals for an order authorizing this Court to consider a second or successive § 2255 motion. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255, 2244(b)(3).
Upon the foregoing, Wright's motion to "correct" the Presentence Investigation Report (doc. no. 487) is DENIED.
ORDER ENTERED.
