USA v. Medru Marcus

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-16179
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 5:02-cr-00006-MTT-CHW-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MEDRU MARCUS,
a.k.a. Zeke,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Georgia
________________________
(August 26, 2013)
Before PRYOR, MARTIN and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 12-16179 Date Filed: 08/26/2013 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Medru Marcus, a federal prisoner, appeals the denial of his motion to reduce
his sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3582, under Amendment 750 of the Sentencing
Guidelines. Marcus argues that, under Freeman v. United States, 564 U.S. __, 131
S. Ct. 2685 (2011), his sentence was “based on” a sentencing range that has been
lowered by the Sentencing Commission and that he is subject to the new
mandatory penalties under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. We affirm.
The district court correctly denied Marcus’s motion. Marcus was sentenced
as a career offender, and Amendment 750 did not alter his sentencing range. See
United States v. Lawson, 686 F.3d 1317, 1321 (11th Cir.), cert. denied 133 S. Ct.
568 (2012). And because the Fair Sentencing Act is not an amendment to the
Guidelines, the Act cannot serve as a basis for a sentence reduction under section
3582(a)(2). See United States v. Berry, 701 F.3d 374, 377 (11th Cir. 2012). Even
if we were to assume that Marcus could base his motion on the Fair Sentencing
Act, his motion would fail because he was sentenced before the effective date of
the Act. See United States v. Hippolyte, 712 F.3d 535, 542 (11th Cir. 2013).
AFFIRMED.
Case: 12-16179 Date Filed: 08/26/2013 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --