U.S. v. BROWN, 1:13-cr-42. (2015)
Court: District Court, W.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20150116j72
Visitors: 20
Filed: Jan. 14, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 14, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JANET T. NEFF, District Judge. Defendant Willie Earl Brown has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (Dkt 156) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) on the basis of Amendment 782 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, made retroactive by the Sentencing Commission. Section 3582(c)(2) permits a court to reduce the term of imprisonment of a defendant who has been sentenced based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sent
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JANET T. NEFF, District Judge. Defendant Willie Earl Brown has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (Dkt 156) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) on the basis of Amendment 782 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, made retroactive by the Sentencing Commission. Section 3582(c)(2) permits a court to reduce the term of imprisonment of a defendant who has been sentenced based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sente..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JANET T. NEFF, District Judge.
Defendant Willie Earl Brown has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (Dkt 156) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(2) on the basis of Amendment 782 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, made retroactive by the Sentencing Commission.
Section 3582(c)(2) permits a court to reduce the term of imprisonment of a defendant who has been sentenced based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Amendment 782 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines reduced by two levels the offense levels assigned to the quantities that trigger the statutory mandatory minimum penalties in U.S.S.G. §§ 2D1.1 and 2D1.11. These modifications were made retroactive effective November 1, 2014. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10.
However, the defendant appears to be ineligible for consideration of modification of sentence (Dkt 162), because the mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment was imposed at sentencing. Counsel for defendant has filed a response to the report of eligibility (Dkt 173) and preserves the issue for future consideration should the law change.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion for modification of sentence (Dkt 156) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
