Opinion
Criminal 5:13-8-KKC
08-01-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ERNEST WILLIAM SINGLETON, Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
KAREN K. CALDWELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
This matter is before the Court on a motion (DE 542) by defendant Ernest William Singleton requesting a sentence reduction under Amendment 821 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The Court has reviewed the defendant's record to determine if he is eligible for relief under Amendment 821.
The amendment alters the application of the Guidelines with respect to certain offenders who (a) earned criminal history “status points” based on commission of an offense while serving a criminal justice sentence (Part A of Amendment 821), or (b) presented zero criminal history points at the time of sentencing (Part B, Subpart 1). In addition, the United States Sentencing Commission voted to give retroactive effect to these two changes.
Defendant Wardle is not, however, eligible for a reduction under the amendment. The Court did not apply any “status points” against her during sentencing. Thus, Part A does not apply to her. As to Part B, Subpart 1, Singleton had no criminal history points. However, a defendant is entitled to the sentence reduction for zero criminal history points only if the defendant did not receive an adjustment under §4C1.1. See USSG §4C1.1(a)(7). At sentencing, Singleton received an adjustment under USSG §2D1.1 for possession of a firearm and under USSG §3B1.1(a) for an aggravated role. Accordingly, Defendant is ineligible for a reduction under Amendment 821.
For all these reasons, the Court hereby ORDERS that Singleton's request (DE 542) for a sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 821 to the Sentencing Guidelines is DENIED.