From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Gilchrist

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Nov 13, 2013
2:03-cr-70-FtM-29DNF (M.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2013)

Opinion

2:03-cr-70-FtM-29DNF

11-13-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. IMMANUEL GILCHRIST


OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on defendant's Motion for Modification or Reduction of Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (Doc. #46), filed on October 31, 2013. Defendant seeks a reduction of his sentence based upon Amendment 750 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. Because defendant is not eligible for a reduction of his term of imprisonment under Amendment 750, his motion will be denied.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) gives the court discretionary authority to reduce the term of imprisonment portion of a defendant's sentence under certain circumstances. Section 3582(c)(2) provides in pertinent part:

(c) The court may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed except that -
. . .
(2) in the case of a defendant who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(o), upon motion of the defendant or the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, or on its own motion, the court may reduce the term of imprisonment, after considering the factors set forth in section 3553(a) to the extent that they are applicable, if such a reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The relevant United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.) policy statement is U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, as amended by Amendment 750.

Because defendant was sentenced as a career offender, he was not "sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission", as required by § 3582(c)(2). Therefore defendant is not eligible for a reduction pursuant to Amendment 750. United States v. Lawson, 686 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2012)(addressing Amendment 750); United States v. Moore, 541 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 2008)(addressing Amendment 706), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 1601 (2009); United States v. White, 2013 WL 5735116 (11th Cir. 2013)(summarizing case law in circuit).

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

Defendant's Motion for Modification or Reduction of Sentence Pursuant ot 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (Doc. #46) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this 13th day of November, 2013.

_________________

JOHN E. STEELE

United States District Judge
Copies:
Counsel of Record
Immanuel Gilchrist


Summaries of

United States v. Gilchrist

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Nov 13, 2013
2:03-cr-70-FtM-29DNF (M.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Gilchrist

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. IMMANUEL GILCHRIST

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

Date published: Nov 13, 2013

Citations

2:03-cr-70-FtM-29DNF (M.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2013)