Opinion
Case Number: 4:08-CR-00018-01-SWW USM Number: 24981-009
11-02-2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DWIGHT ANTWAN CRAWFORD
Chris Tarver Defendant's Attorney
Date of Original Judgment: February 27, 2009
(Or Date of Last Amended Judgment)
Chris Tarver
Defendant's Attorney
Upon motion of [×] the defendant [] the Director of the Bureau of Prisons [] the court under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(u), and having considered such motion,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:
[] DENIED.
[×] GRANTED and the defendant's previously imposed sentence of imprisonment of 87 months is reduced to 60 months.
I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Previous Offense Level ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦(Before ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦27 ¦Amended Offense Level:¦23 ¦ ¦Departure/Variance/Rule ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦35): ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +-------------------------+--------------+----------------------+-------------¦ ¦Criminal History ¦III ¦Criminal History ¦III ¦ ¦Category: ¦ ¦Category: ¦ ¦ +-------------------------+--------------+----------------------+-------------¦ ¦Previous Guideline Range:¦87 to 108 ¦Amended Guideline ¦60 to 71 ¦ ¦ ¦months ¦Range: ¦months ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE
[×] The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range. [] The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the time of sentencing as a result of a departure or Rule 35 reduction, and the reduced sentence is comparably less than the amended guideline range. [] Other (specify) ___. III. FURTHER EXPLANATION (e.g., recommendations to the Bureau of Prisons) (if necessary) The Order is effective immediately on November 1, 2011, if Congress does not override the United Sentencing Commission's determination that the new guidelines are retroactive. If Congress determines that the amendments are not retroactive, this order will be void and vacated. Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated February 27, 2009 will remain in effect. Effective Date (if delayed): November 1, 2011
Susan Webber Wright
United States District Judge