U.S. v. BRADFORD, 09-20133-JWL. (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Kansas
Number: infdco20120601a87
Visitors: 5
Filed: May 31, 2012
Latest Update: May 31, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, District Judge. On April 25, 2012, the court denied defendant Radell Bradford's Motion for Modification of Sentence on the merits (doc. 1493). For the reasons set forth in that Memorandum and Order, Ms. Bradford is ineligible for relief pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). As the facts establish that the defendant is ineligible for relief, the court is without jurisdiction to consider a reduction of sentence under 3582(c). United States v. Curtis, 25
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, District Judge. On April 25, 2012, the court denied defendant Radell Bradford's Motion for Modification of Sentence on the merits (doc. 1493). For the reasons set forth in that Memorandum and Order, Ms. Bradford is ineligible for relief pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). As the facts establish that the defendant is ineligible for relief, the court is without jurisdiction to consider a reduction of sentence under 3582(c). United States v. Curtis, 252..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, District Judge.
On April 25, 2012, the court denied defendant Radell Bradford's Motion for Modification of Sentence on the merits (doc. 1493).
For the reasons set forth in that Memorandum and Order, Ms. Bradford is ineligible for relief pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). As the facts establish that the defendant is ineligible for relief, the court is without jurisdiction to consider a reduction of sentence under § 3582(c). United States v. Curtis, 252 Fed. App'x 886, 887 (10th Cir. 2007) (Where the Amendment did not subsequently lower the defendant's Guideline range, the district court has no jurisdiction to consider a modification to his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)). As such, the court's prior Order is amended nunc pro tunc to dismiss the defendant's Motion for Modification of Sentence for lack of jurisdiction.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT that defendant's Motion for Modification of Sentence (doc. 1400) is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
