Opinion
CR-19-396-D
08-01-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SAUL FERNANDEZ-HERRERA, Defendant.
ORDER
TIMOTHY D. DeGIUSTI, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Defendant's pro se “Motion to Modify Sentence Pursuant to the Dictates of Title 18, United States Code, Section § 3582(c)(2)” [Doc. No. 82]. The Motion is both unsigned and otherwise ineffective.
Defendant moves for a reduction of his prison sentence based on a retroactive amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines, Amendment 821. Defendant filed a similar motion in April 2024, which was dismissed based on the finding that “[n]o reduction is authorized because Amendment 821 does not have the effect of lowering Defendant's applicable guideline range.” See Reasons [Doc. No. 81] (citing United States v. White, 765 F.3d 1240, 1250 (10th Cir. 2014) (district court lacks jurisdiction to act on § 3582(c)(2) motion if defendant is ineligible for relief)). The Court's finding was based on both the government's opposition and his appointed counsel's advisement that “neither the revised U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1 nor § 4C1.1 amends [Defendant's] guideline sentencing range.” See Notice [Doc. No. 76]. For these same reasons, the Court finds that Defendant is ineligible for relief and thus the Court lacks jurisdiction to act.
Because Defendant appears pro se, the Court liberally construes his pleadings and arguments. See Yang v. Archuleta, 525 F.3d 925, 927 n.1 (10th Cir. 2008); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Modify Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) [Doc. No. 82] is DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED