UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
March 11, 2008
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
USM No. 12165-052
ORDER REGARDING MOTION FOR SENTENCE REDUCTION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
Date of Previous Judgment: August 29, 2002
Peter Fitzgerald, Esq. Defendant's Attorney
(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Applicable)
Upon motion of X the defendant G the Director of the Bureau of Prisons 9 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,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:
X DENIED. The defendant's previously imposed sentence of imprisonment remains the same.
I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE(Prior to Any Departures)
Previous Offense Level: Amended Offense Level: Criminal History Category: Criminal History Category:
Previous Guideline Range: to months Amended Guideline Range: to months
II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE
G The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range. 9 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.
G Other (explain):__________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________
III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
The defendant is ineligible for a sentence reduction as the defendant's sentence was based on a cross reference to the sentencing guidelines for the offense of murder.
All provisions of the judgment dated August 29, 2002 shall remain in effect.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.