The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
11-50145•United States of America v. Joseph Turner, a.k.a. Michael W. Daniels, a.k.a. Joseph J. Turner, a.k.a. Michael J.…
11-50145Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFeb 22, 2012
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. Appellant. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOSEPH TURNER, a.k.a. Michael W.
Daniels, a.k.a. Joseph J. Turner, a.k.a.
Michael J. Turner,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50145
D.C. No. 2:00-cr-00904-GHK
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
George H. King, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 21, 2012**
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner Joseph Turner appeals pro se the district court’s order
denying his motion to modify his term of imprisonment following jury-trial
FILED
FEB 22 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS
-- 1 of 2 --
11-50145 2
convictions on, inter alia, two counts of using or carrying a firearm during a crime
of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Turner contends that the district court erred in imposing a mandatory 25-
year minimum sentence for a second conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), where
the second offense was charged in the same indictment as the first offense. The
district court did not err in determining that this claim is not cognizable under 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c). See United States v. Lightfoot, 626 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th Cir.
2010) (section 3582(c)(2) permits modification only where sentencing range
applicable to defendant has subsequently been lowered). In any event, this
argument is without merit. See United States v. Beltran-Moreno, 556 F.3d 913,
915 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[W]hen the government charges more than one § 924(c)
offense in a single indictment, each additional count is to be treated as a ‘second or
subsequent conviction’ for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(C)(i) and therefore
carries a mandatory minimum sentence of twenty-five years.”)
AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.