Opinion
CASE NO. 4:18 CR 120
10-10-2019
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHELE RANDOLPH, Defendants.
ORDER & OPINION
Before the Court is Defendant Michele Randolph's Motion for Reconsideration, Doc #: 48. For the reasons stated below, Defendant's Motion is DENIED.
Randolph now asserts that the Court may permit her to serve the remainder of her sentence on home detention under Sentencing Guideline § 5C1.1 as amended by the First Step Act. Doc #: 48 at 2. However, Randolph is not eligible for the sentence modification she requests.
To the extent Randolph is seeking a sentence modification under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), her request is denied because she failed to express extraordinary and compelling reasons that warrant a sentence modification and is not at least 70 years old and has not served at least 30 years in prison.
Randolph's request is also denied to the extent she seeks a sentence modification under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). A court may modify a sentence when the sentencing range on which a defendant's sentence was based has been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The only relevant amendment here is the addition of an application note to § 5C1.1, which directs courts to consider imposing sentences other than imprisonment for nonviolent first offenders with a guideline range in Zone A or B of the Sentencing Table. United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual, § 5C1.1, comment. (n.4) (Nov. 2018).
This amendment does not alter Randolph's sentence. The direction to consider sentences other than imprisonment does not alter a sentencing range. See United States v. Lopez, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102441 *3 (S.D. Fla. 2019). Thus, Randolph is not eligible for a sentence modification under § 3582(c)(2).
For the above reasons, Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration, Doc #: 48, is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Dan Aaron Polster October 10 , 2019
DAN AARON POLSTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT