U.S. v. Smallwood

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF, v. JOHN ALISON SMALLWOOD DEFENDANT

Court: United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division

Date published: Mar 13, 2006

Case No. 2:01CR20040-001 (W.D. Ark. Mar. 13, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 2:01CR20040-001.

March 13, 2006

ORDER

ROBERT DAWSON, District Judge

Currently before the court is Defendant's Motion to Reduce Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (Doc. 25) and the Government's Response (Doc. 26). Defendant moves the Court to reduce his sentence contending that his guideline sentencing range was incorrectly calculated utilizing U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1 which was deleted and consolidated with U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 prior to his sentencing.

Defendant's argument is without merit as Defendant had the opportunity to challenge the calculation of his guideline sentencing range at the time of sentencing and on direct appeal and did not do so. Defendant's failure to raise this objection at sentencing or on appeal procedurally bars him from raising the issue. See United States v. Murphy, 248 F.3d 777 (8^th Cir. 2001). Further, even if Defendant's objection should not be barred, it is without merit as his offense level would have been the same if calculated under § 2B1.1 or § 2F1.1. Therefore, Defendant would have received the same sentence. Upon due consideration, the motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.