Filed: Dec. 31, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 31, 2019
Summary: Not for Publication ORDER ESTHER SALAS , District Judge . It appearing that: 1. Before the Court is defendant James Craft's ("Defendant") pro se motion for reconsideration of his sentence. (D.E. No. 25 ("Motion")). Having reviewed the parties' submissions, the Court DENIES Defendant's motion. 1 2. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1), a court "may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed except" in certain limited circumstances. United States v. Sharpe, 554 F. App'x
Summary: Not for Publication ORDER ESTHER SALAS , District Judge . It appearing that: 1. Before the Court is defendant James Craft's ("Defendant") pro se motion for reconsideration of his sentence. (D.E. No. 25 ("Motion")). Having reviewed the parties' submissions, the Court DENIES Defendant's motion. 1 2. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1), a court "may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed except" in certain limited circumstances. United States v. Sharpe, 554 F. App'x 1..
More
Not for Publication
ORDER
ESTHER SALAS, District Judge.
It appearing that:
1. Before the Court is defendant James Craft's ("Defendant") pro se motion for reconsideration of his sentence. (D.E. No. 25 ("Motion")). Having reviewed the parties' submissions, the Court DENIES Defendant's motion.1
2. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1), a court "may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed except" in certain limited circumstances. United States v. Sharpe, 554 F. App'x 123 (3d Cir. 2014) (citing United States v. Washington, 549 F.3d 905, 915 (3d Cir. 2008)). These circumstances are:
(1) "the need to correct an arithmetical, technical or other clear error, Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a);"
(2) "upon motion of the government for the defendant's substantial assistance, Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(d);"
(3) "upon motion of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons based upon the defendant's advanced age or other compelling and extraordinary reasons, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c);"
(4) "to reduce a sentence of imprisonment based upon a sentencing guideline range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)."
United States v. Sharpe, No. 02-0772, D.E. No. 545 (E.D. Pa. filed Sept. 18, 2013), aff'd, 554 F. App'x 123. In addition, "[a] district court may also correct a sentence under Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure." United States v. Bennett, 423 F.3d 271, 277 (3d Cir. 2005). But "[a] court's authority under Rule 36 is limited to the correction of clerical errors in the judgement." Id.
3. Defendant fails to raise any of these limited circumstances permitting the Court to reconsider or modify his sentence.
4. Thus, the Court has no authority to alter the sentence previously imposed. See Sharpe, 554 F. App'x at 123.
Accordingly, IT IS on this 31st day of December, 2019;
ORDERED that Defendant's motion for reconsideration is DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall TERMINATE Docket Entry Number 25.
