Filed: Apr. 03, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 03, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL JOHN R. TUNHEIM , Chief District Judge . Alex John Jones was sentenced in May 2013 for Conspiracy to Participate in Racketeering Activity. (Am. J., May 30, 3013, Docket No. 1235; Indictment, Jan. 19, 2012, Docket No. 1.) In January 2018, Jones filed a motion seeking a sentencing reduction based on "the 2 level reduction for nonviolent drug offenders passed by the U.S.S.C. in 2014." (Mot. to Reduce Sentence, Jan. 22, 2018, Docket No. 1809.) The Court d
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL JOHN R. TUNHEIM , Chief District Judge . Alex John Jones was sentenced in May 2013 for Conspiracy to Participate in Racketeering Activity. (Am. J., May 30, 3013, Docket No. 1235; Indictment, Jan. 19, 2012, Docket No. 1.) In January 2018, Jones filed a motion seeking a sentencing reduction based on "the 2 level reduction for nonviolent drug offenders passed by the U.S.S.C. in 2014." (Mot. to Reduce Sentence, Jan. 22, 2018, Docket No. 1809.) The Court de..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL
JOHN R. TUNHEIM, Chief District Judge.
Alex John Jones was sentenced in May 2013 for Conspiracy to Participate in Racketeering Activity. (Am. J., May 30, 3013, Docket No. 1235; Indictment, Jan. 19, 2012, Docket No. 1.) In January 2018, Jones filed a motion seeking a sentencing reduction based on "the 2 level reduction for nonviolent drug offenders passed by the U.S.S.C. in 2014." (Mot. to Reduce Sentence, Jan. 22, 2018, Docket No. 1809.) The Court denied this motion, finding that Jones was not entitled to a sentencing reduction because his sentencing guideline range was based on two acts of racketeering activity — attempted murder and witness tampering — not a drug offense. (Order, Mar. 27, 2018, Docket No. 1827.) Jones also asked the Court to appoint counsel. (Mot. to Appoint Counsel, Jan. 22, 2018, Docket No. 1810.) Because Jones does not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in sentence modification proceedings, United States v. Harris, 568 F.3d 666, 669 (8th Cir. 2009), the Court will deny the motion.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Appoint Counsel [Docket No. 1810] is DENIED.
