USA v. Richard James Bassett, Jr.

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-16173
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 6:01-cr-00006-JA-GJK-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
versus
RICHARD JAMES BASSETT, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(May 17, 2013)
Before HULL, PRYOR and JORDAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Richard Bassett Jr. appeals the denial of his motion to reduce his sentence
based on Amendment 750 to the Sentencing Guidelines. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The
Case: 12-16173 Date Filed: 05/17/2013 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

2
United States moves for a summary affirmance and to stay the briefing schedule.
Because the “position [of the United States] . . . is clearly right as a matter of law
so that there [is] no substantial question as to the outcome of the case,” Groendyke
Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), we grant the motion
for summary affirmance and dismiss as moot the motion to stay the briefing
schedule.
Bassett’s arguments are foreclosed by our precedent. We have held that
defendants, like Bassett, whose sentences are based on the career offender
guideline, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, not on the drug quantity tables, id. § 2D1.1, are
ineligible for a reduction of their sentence under Amendment 750. United States v.
Lawson, 686 F.3d 1317, 1321 (11th Cir. 2012); United States v. Moore, 541 F.3d
1323, 1327–30 (11th Cir. 2008). Bassett argues that the district court should have
considered the statutory sentencing factors, 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), but a district court
considers those sentencing factors only when it has the authority to reduce a
sentence and decides whether to grant a reduction. The district court lacked the
authority to reduce Barrett’s sentence.
We AFFIRM the denial of Bassett’s motion to reduce his sentence, and we
DISMISS as moot the motion to stay the briefing schedule.
Case: 12-16173 Date Filed: 05/17/2013 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --