USA v. Thorn et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CENTRAL DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V. 	No. 4:20-CR-00098-10 JM
KELBY SHANE EPPERSON
ORDER
Defendant’s Motion to Reduce Sentence (Doc. No. 532) is DENIED for a few reasons.
First, Amendment 829 is not retroactive.1
Second, as discussed in the February 26, 2024 Order, Amendment 821 does not lower
Defendant’s criminal history category or guideline range.2
Third, Defendant’s plea agreement “waive[d] the right to have the sentence modified
pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3582(c)(2) . . . .” 3 Because Defendant
knowingly and voluntarily entered into his plea agreement, including this waiver, he is not
entitled to relief.4
IT IS SO ORDERED this 8 th day of December, 2025.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1 See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(d).
2 Doc. No. 483. See U.S.S.G. § 1.10(a)(2) (“Exclusions.—A reduction in the defendant’s
term of imprisonment is not consistent with this policy statement and therefore is not authorized
under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) if— . . . an amendment listed in subsection (d) does not have the
effect of lowering the defendant’s applicable guideline range.”).
3 Doc. No. 286.
4 United States v. Cowan, 781 F. App’x 571 (8th Cir. 2019) (affirming dismissal of a §
3582 (c)(2) motion when the record establish that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered
the plea agreement).
Case 4:20-cr-00098-JM Document 533 Filed 12/08/25 Page 1 of 1