U.S. v. Williams

Full title: United States of America, v. Loreze Williams, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Columbia Division

Date published: Jun 17, 2011

Cr. No. 3:09-825 (CMC) (D.S.C. Jun. 17, 2011)

Opinion

Cr. No. 3:09-825 (CMC).

June 17, 2011

OPINION and ORDER

CAMERON CURRIE, District Judge

This matter is before the court on Defendant's Motion and Supplemental Motion to compel the Government to file a Rule 35 motion. Dkt. Nos. 986 991. The Government has responded in opposition, and this matter is ripe for resolution.

Under Rule 35(b), the decision to move for reduction of sentence is solely in the discretion of the Government. The district court is without authority to compel such a motion unless the Government's failure to file resulted from an unconstitutional motive or was not rationally related to a legitimate government goal. Wade v. United States, 504 U.S. 181, 185-86 (1992); United States v. Butler, 272 F.3d 683, 686 (4th Cir. 2001). Defendant must make a "substantial threshold showing," Wade, 504 U.S. at 186, of either of these elements which should constitute more than a recitation of the assistance provided.

Defendant has not made a "substantial threshold showing" relating to either element noted above. Therefore, for this reason, and for the reasons noted by the Government in its response, Defendant's motions are denied without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Columbia, South Carolina June 16, 2011