Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Dock, 1:11CR00026-003. (2020)

Court: District Court, W.D. Virginia Number: infdco20200318830 Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 16, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 16, 2020
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER JAMES P. JONES , District Judge . The defendant has filed a pro se Motion to Reduce Sentence, in which he contends that his sentence of supervised release must be reduced to five years, rather than the ten years as recited by the court at sentencing and contained in his judgment of conviction. Tr. 67, ECF No. 359; J. 3, ECF No. 335. The defendant is mistaken. While the offense for which the defendant was convicted provides for a minimum of five years of supervised relea
More

OPINION AND ORDER

The defendant has filed a pro se Motion to Reduce Sentence, in which he contends that his sentence of supervised release must be reduced to five years, rather than the ten years as recited by the court at sentencing and contained in his judgment of conviction. Tr. 67, ECF No. 359; J. 3, ECF No. 335.

The defendant is mistaken. While the offense for which the defendant was convicted provides for a minimum of five years of supervised release, 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A), it provides that the supervised release term must be "at least" five years. Id. A longer term, up to life, is not prohibited. As the court explained at the defendant's sentencing on September 24, 2012:

I will also say that the period of time of supervision, I believe, is necessary because of the defendant's longstanding drug addiction and criminal record in order to make sure that he is able to reenter society without further violations. Based on his history of violating supervision I believe that a lengthy term of supervision is necessary.

Tr. 68, ECF No. 359.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant's motion, ECF No. 541, 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