Opinion
8:17-cr-286-CEH-AAS
10-31-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JERRY MOISES CAICEDO-AVILA
ORDER
CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Jerry Moises Caicedo-Avila's Motion to Modify Term of Imprisonment Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (Doc. 103). In the motion, Caicedo-Avila seeks a sentence reduction based on a retroactive application of a change to the sentencing guidelines known as Amendment 782.
The Federal Public Defender was appointed on Caicedo-Avila's behalf (Docs. 105, 107). The Federal Public Defender and the United States Probation Office each filed a memorandum addressing the retroactive application of Amendment 782 to Seraphin's sentence (Docs. 106, 108).
Having considered the motion and being fully advised in its premises, the Court will deny Caicedo-Avila's motion to reduce his sentence.
Background
On November 21, 2017, Caicedo-Avila was sentenced to a term of 120 months' imprisonment upon his guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine while on board a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and conspiracy to distribute and possess the same. Doc. 92. Caicedo-Avila is currently incarcerated at FCI Butner.
In his motion, Caicedo-Avila relies on a 2014 amendment of the sentencing guidelines, known as Amendment 782, that he states reduced by two levels the quantity threshold for all drug offenses. Doc. 103 at 1. He seeks a retroactive reduction in his sentence in accordance with the amendment under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). Id. at 12.
The United States Department of Probation submitted a memorandum in which it found that Caicedo-Avila is ineligible for retroactive relief from Amendment 782. Doc. 106. The Department explained that Caicedo-Avila had already been sentenced in accordance with Amendment 782, and had received the statutory minimum for his offense. Id. at 1. The Federal Public Defender concurred in the Department's conclusion, explaining that Amendment 782 was already in effect at the time of Caicedo-Avila's sentencing in 2017. Doc. 108 at 2-3.
Discussion
The Court, in general, may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed. See United States v. Pubien, 805 Fed.Appx. 727, 729 (11th Cir. 2020) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)). 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) provides a limited exception in which a court may reduce the term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the United States Sentencing Commission. The defendant, as the movant, bears the burden of proving his eligibility for a § 3582(c)(2) sentence reduction. United States v. Hamilton, 715 F.3d 328, 337 (11th Cir. 2013).
Amendment 782, on which Caicedo-Avila relies, resulted from the United States Sentencing Commission's unanimous vote to amend the sentencing guidelines to lower most base offense levels by two levels across all drug types. United States v. Maiello, 805 F.3d 992, 994 (11th Cir. 2015). The amendment became effective immediately for defendants sentenced on or after November 1, 2014. Id. at 995.
Here, Caicedo-Avila was sentenced on November 21, 2017, three years after Amendment 782 went into effect. He is therefore not eligible for a reduction in sentence based on Amendment 782 because he was already sentenced in accordance with it. See Docs. 106, 108. His motion is due to be denied.
The Court further notes that Amendment 782 would not have impacted Caicedo-Avila's offense level even if he had been sentenced before it went into effect. The prior version of the sentencing guidelines mandated that 150 kilograms or more of cocaine resulted in a base offense level of 38, while the current guidelines state that 450 kilograms or more result in level 38. See Editors' Notes to 2014 Amendments, U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1. Here, Caicedo-Avila was convicted of possessing 540 kilograms of cocaine. Doc. 79 at 5-6. Therefore, his base offense level would have been level 38 both before and after the enactment of Amendment 782. See United States v. Sanchez, 630 Fed.Appx. 893, 894-95 (11th Cir. 2015) (defendant not entitled to resentencing where “he was subject to the same base offense level, 38, under the postamendment guidelines as he was under the pre-amendment guidelines”).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1. Defendant Jerry Moises Caicedo-Avila's Motion to Modify Term of Imprisonment Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (Doc. 103) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED