Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. SINADINOS, 1:12-cr-131. (2015)

Court: District Court, W.D. Michigan Number: infdco20150803662 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jul. 31, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 31, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JANET T. NEFF , District Judge . Defendant Andrew James Sinadinos has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (Dkt 55) 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. The U.S. Probation Department has filed a Sentence Modification Report (Dkt 58), and Defendant has filed a Response (Dkt 65) agreeing with the conclusion of the probation dep
More

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Defendant Andrew James Sinadinos has filed a motion for modification or reduction of sentence (Dkt 55) 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. The U.S. Probation Department has filed a Sentence Modification Report (Dkt 58), and Defendant has filed a Response (Dkt 65) agreeing with the conclusion of the probation department.

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.

Defendant appears to be ineligible for a reduction in sentence pursuant to the policy statements of the U.S. Sentencing Commission because under the new calculation, Count 7, Felon in Possession of a Firearm, produces a higher total offense level and does not result in a lower guideline range. Defendant wishes to preserve the issue for future consideration should the law change. See Cvijetinovic v. Eberlin, 617 F.3d 833, 840 (6th Cir. 2010).

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion for modification of sentence (Dkt 55) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is DENIED.

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