Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. DAMIAN, 6:04-88-KKC. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. Kentucky Number: infdco20160325g11 Visitors: 19
Filed: Mar. 23, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 23, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER KAREN K. CALDWELL , Chief District Judge . This matter is before the Court on remand from the Sixth Circuit following this Court's denial of Defendant Carlos Damian's request for a sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 782 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. (DE 180, 190.) The amendment reduces by two the offense levels assigned in the Drug Quantity Table, U.S.S.G. 2D1.1, resulting in lower guideline ranges for most drug trafficking offenses. The Si
More

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on remand from the Sixth Circuit following this Court's denial of Defendant Carlos Damian's request for a sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 782 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. (DE 180, 190.) The amendment reduces by two the offense levels assigned in the Drug Quantity Table, U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, resulting in lower guideline ranges for most drug trafficking offenses. The Sixth Circuit has directed this Court to consider the appropriateness of a sentence reduction under the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.

In 2005, Defendant pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute methamphetamine. (DE 83.) On March 16, 2006, this Court sentenced Damian to a term of 160 months imprisonment, an eight (8) month variance from the lowest end of the applicable guideline range of 168-210 months. (DE 104.). This Court denied Damian's request for a sentence reduction based on his amended guideline range of 135-168 months because his original sentence fell within the amended guideline range. (DE 180.)

Upon reconsideration of the nature and circumstances of Defendant's offense and his history and characteristics, this Court is persuaded that a sentence of 135 months would adequately promote respect for the law, provide just punishment, afford adequate deterrence, and protect the public from future crimes by the Defendant. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) states that "the court shall not reduce the defendant's term of imprisonment . . . to a term that is less than the minimum of the amended guideline range." Thus, 135 months is the minimum sentence Defendant may now receive. The pre-sentence report produced for Damian's original sentencing recommended a minimum guideline sentence based on the § 3553(a) factors, those same factors previously contributed to this Court's variance, and now persuade this Court that a reduction of Defendant's sentence is appropriate.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. This Court's Order denying Defendant's motion for sentence reduction (DE 180) is SET ASIDE;

2. Defendant's motion for sentence reduction (DE 175) is GRANTED;

3. This Court will enter an order reducing the previously imposed sentence of 160 months to 135 months.

Source:  Leagle

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