U.S. v. RILEY, 1:09-CR-337. (2015)
Court: District Court, W.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20150204f36
Visitors: 22
Filed: Feb. 02, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 02, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ROBERT HOLMES BELL, District Judge. Defendant Effrem Riley has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (ECF No. 43) 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 S
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ROBERT HOLMES BELL, District Judge. Defendant Effrem Riley has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (ECF No. 43) 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 Se..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ROBERT HOLMES BELL, District Judge.
Defendant Effrem Riley has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (ECF No. 43) 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, because the defendant's base offense level was calculated under the career offender guideline, the Probation Office has now found Defendant ineligible for a reduction in sentence under Guideline Amendment 782. No objections have been filed to the Report of Eligibility within the time frame prescribed.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion for modification of sentence (ECF No. 43) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
