U.S. v. Basey

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. EARNESTINE BASEY, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, D. Kansas

Date published: Feb 3, 2003

Case No. 92-40036-01-JAR, 03-3050-JAR (D. Kan. Feb. 3, 2003)

Opinion

Case No. 92-40036-01-JAR, 03-3050-JAR

February 3, 2003

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION

JULIE A. ROBINSON, United States District Judge

This matter is before the Court on defendant's pro se Motion to Reduce or Correct Sentence Pursuant to Rule 35 (Doc. 215). The Court¹ has thoroughly reviewed the petitioner's pleadings and the record he submitted in support of this motion. For the following reasons, the Court concludes that the petitioner is not entitled to relief and the Court therefore denies the Motion to Reduce or Correct sentence and dismisses this action.

1 This matter has been assigned to the undersigned Judge, because the Honorable Dale E. Saffels, who sentenced this defendant, is now deceased.

Defendant brings his motion under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b)(2). The defendant's motion argues for a reduction in his sentence for medical reasons. While this is a valid ground for a reduction in sentence, it is not automatic. Defendant has offered no evidence that his medical needs are not being met in prison. In fact, defendant's motion informs the Court that he has been serving his sentence in a medical facility for the past three years. Defendant argues that he may never be medically capable of placement back in general population. This is not a reason for reducing defendant's sentence. The purpose of deterrence and punishment are being met while defendant serves the sentence imposed on him, whether he is placed in a medical facility or in general population.² Defendant continues to receive the care he needs in prison³ and placement in a medical facility does not impose any additional punishment on the defendant.

2 United States v. Bundy, 287 F. Supp. 95, 97 (D.Tenn. 1983) ("overriding goal of general deterrence and marking of the gravity of the particular offense committed by [defendant] would have been disserved markedly if her sentence were reduced").

3 Id. (reduction in sentence denied where defendant alleged debilitating arthritic condition which the prison system could adequately provide for).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the defendant's motion under Rule 35 (Doc. 215) is DENIED.