Opinion
15-cr-632 (JGK)
01-19-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JOSE HEBERTO ALVAREZ DENIS, Defendant.
ORDER
JOHN G. KOELTL, DISTRICT JUDGE
On December 8, 2023, the defendant requested that the Court |i appoint counsel to determine whether the defendant qualifies for i a Guidelines reduction under the recent Amendment 821 to the J Federal Sentencing Guidelines, see ECF No. 117, which went into ¶¶ effect on November 1, 2023 and applies retroactively, see (Sentencing Guidelines, 88 Fed.Reg. 28,254, 28,270 (effective ! Nov. 1, 2023); accord U.S.S.G. § 4Al.l(e). The Court appointed) counsel pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act, see ECF No. 118, (and for the following reasons, finds that the defendant is not (entitled to a Guidelines reduction under Amendment 821.)
Part A of Amendment 821 to the Guidelines addresses "status 5 points" for offenders and limits the overall criminal history j impact of "status points" for defendants that were subject to [ any criminal justice sentence at the time of the offense. See [ U.S.S.G. § 4Al.l(e). Part B of Amendment 821 provides a decrease I of two levels for defendants who did not receive any criminal j history points under Chapter Four, Part A, and whose offense did not involve aggravating factors specified in the statute. See U.S.S.G. § 4C1.1(a) .
In this case, the defendant does not qualify for a reduction under Part A or Part B of Amendment 821. At the time of sentencing, the defendant had three criminal history points and did not commit the offense for which he was sentenced while serving a criminal justice sentence. See PSR ¶¶ 30-34.
Accordingly, the defendant does not qualify for a Guidelines reduction under Amendment 821.
Moreover, to the extent the defendant moves for a reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), that motion is denied without prejudice. The defendant does not explain what extraordinary and compelling circumstances exist to warrant such a reduction. The Court considered the relevant factors at the time of sentencing and varied downward based on mitigating factors. See ECF No. 61, Sentencing Tr. at 20-21. Therefore, the defendant's motion is denied without prejudice.
The Clerk is directed to close all pending motions.
SO ORDERED.