U.S. v. VELUZ, 2:02-cr-00078-LRH-PAL. (2013)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20130531e70
Visitors: 11
Filed: May 30, 2013
Latest Update: May 30, 2013
Summary: ORDER LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge. Before the court is Defendant Richard Veluz' Motion in Support of Review and Correction of Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C 3582(c)(2) and U.S. v. Booker and U.S. v. Ameline (doc. #18) filed January 11, 2006. Having read and considered Defendant's motion, and the Government's Response thereto (doc. #19), filed January 30, 2006, the court finds that Defendant's motion must be denied. First, the relief requested by Defendant Veluz is not available under
Summary: ORDER LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge. Before the court is Defendant Richard Veluz' Motion in Support of Review and Correction of Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C 3582(c)(2) and U.S. v. Booker and U.S. v. Ameline (doc. #18) filed January 11, 2006. Having read and considered Defendant's motion, and the Government's Response thereto (doc. #19), filed January 30, 2006, the court finds that Defendant's motion must be denied. First, the relief requested by Defendant Veluz is not available under ..
More
ORDER
LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge.
Before the court is Defendant Richard Veluz' Motion in Support of Review and Correction of Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C § 3582(c)(2) and U.S. v. Booker and U.S. v. Ameline (doc. #18) filed January 11, 2006. Having read and considered Defendant's motion, and the Government's Response thereto (doc. #19), filed January 30, 2006, the court finds that Defendant's motion must be denied.
First, the relief requested by Defendant Veluz is not available under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) because Defendant's motion is not based upon the lowering of applicable sentencing guidelines by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(c). Second, to the extent Defendant motion seeks relief under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) or United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Circ. 2005), Defendant's motion is untimely.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Richard Veluz' Motion in Support of Review and Correction of Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and U.S. v. Booker and U.S. v. Ameline (doc. #18) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
