Opinion
5:06-cr-29-JA-PRL
04-30-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ALVIN DORSEY
ORDER
JOHN ANTOON II United States District Judge.
This case is before the Court on the Defendant's pro se motion to reduce his sentence (Doc. 797), his pro se supplement to this motion (Doc. 817), and his pro se request that the Court expedite ruling on the motion (Doc. 810). At the Defendant's urging, (Doc. 802), the Court appointed an attorney to help him with his motion, (Doc. 809). After consulting with the Defendant and “carefully and diligently review[ing] the entire record,” the attorney did not discern “any non-frivolous argument that he c[ould] present in good faith” to support the motion and thus asked to withdraw, (Doc. 818 at 1), which the Court allowed, (Doc. 822). Having reviewed the Defendant's submissions, the Court agrees with his attorney's determination that his pro se motion is without merit.
In his motion, the Defendant seeks “immediate release” from prison under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) based on changes in the law. (Doc. 797 at 1-2). In his supplement to the motion, he further discusses changes in the law. (Doc. 817). However, in neither his motion nor his supplement-which are quite brief-does he mention the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors or his dangerousness (or lack thereof)- (See Docs. 797 & 817). See United States v. Frazier, 823 F.3d 1329, 1332 (11th Cir. 2016) (“Any reduction . . . must be consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission. The district court must consider the § 3553(a) factors and the nature and severity of the danger to any person or the community posed by a sentence reduction. It also may consider the defendant's post-sentencing conduct.” (quotation and citations omitted)). The Court previously found that the § 3553(a) factors counseled against a sentence reduction, (Doc. 783 at 2), and is not presently persuaded otherwise.
For all these reasons, it is ORDERED that the Defendant's pro se motion to reduce his sentence (Doc. 797) is DENIED. And his pro se request that the Court expedite ruling on the motion (Doc. 810) is DENIED as moot.
DONE and ORDERED.