From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District of Colorado
Feb 9, 2012
Case No: 91-cr-00188-LTB-04 (D. Colo. Feb. 9, 2012)

Opinion

Case No: 91-cr-00188-LTB-04 USM No: 97346-012

02-09-2012

United States of America v. ANTHONY WALTER SMITH

Raymond P. Moore, FPD Defendant's Attorney


Raymond P. Moore, FPD

Defendant's Attorney

Date of Previous Judgment: July 24, 2008

(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Applicable)

Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

Upon motion of × the defendant [] the Director of the Bureau of Prisons [] the court under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(u), and having considered such motion, and taking into account the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), to the extent that they are applicable, IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:

× DENIED. [] GRANTED and the defendant's previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in the last judgment issued) of ____ months is reduced to ____ I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE (Prior to Any Departures)

+---------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Previous offense Level: ¦43 ¦Amended offense Level: ¦43 ¦ +--------------------------+----+--------------------------+----¦ ¦Criminal History Category:¦II ¦Criminal History Category:¦II ¦ +--------------------------+----+--------------------------+----¦ ¦Previous Guideline Range: ¦Life¦Amended Guideline Range: ¦Life¦ +---------------------------------------------------------------+

II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE

[] The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range.

[] The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the time of sentencing as a result of a departure or Rule 35 reduction, and the reduced sentence is comparably less than the amended guideline range.

[] Other (explain):

III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated February 19, 1993, shall remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Lewis T. Babcock

Judge's signature

Effective Date: _______________

(if different from order date)

Lewis T. Babcock , Senior United States District Judge

Printed name and title


Summaries of

United States v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District of Colorado
Feb 9, 2012
Case No: 91-cr-00188-LTB-04 (D. Colo. Feb. 9, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:United States of America v. ANTHONY WALTER SMITH

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District of Colorado

Date published: Feb 9, 2012

Citations

Case No: 91-cr-00188-LTB-04 (D. Colo. Feb. 9, 2012)