Opinion
05-CR-960 (JPO)
12-10-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JOEL SPIGELMAN, Defendant.
ORDER
J. PAUL OETKEN, District Judge:
On September 27, 2021, Defendant filed a motion requesting appointment of counsel and a sentence reduction under the First Step Act, contending that the trial court violated Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). (Dkt. No. 221.) On December 1, 2021, Defendant again requested appointment of counsel and a sentence reduction on the same grounds. (Dkt. No. 222.) On December 7, 2021, the Government filed a response, arguing that Defendant's motions should be denied because (1) the Second Circuit rejected Defendant's Apprendi claim made in his most recent Section 2255 motion and there is nothing in the First Step Act that provides a mechanism for raising an Apprendi claim outside of the Section 2255 procedures; (2) Defendant does not provide any support in the record that the trial court violated Apprendi; and (3) the application of the concurrent sentence doctrine applies so there is no reason to address the merits of Defendant's Apprendi claim. (Dkt. No. 224.)
The Court agrees with the Government. The Second Circuit denied Defendant's Apprendi claim (see Dkt. No. 212), and this Court is bound by the Circuit's decision. To the extent Defendant is requesting a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), the motion is denied for the reasons stated in this Court's December 21, 2020 order. (Dkt. No. 205).
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's motions for a sentence reduction are DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close Docket Numbers 221 and 222. 1
The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Defendant.
SO ORDERED. 2