5:05-cr-00009•USA v. Eckles et al
Full text
O AO 247 (NC/W 11/11) Order Regarding M otion for Sentence Reduction UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Western District of North Carolina United States of America ) ) ) ) ) ) v. SHELIA DENISE W HITE Case No: 5:05CR9-17 USM No: 19960-058 Date of Original Judgment: June 19, 2006 Date of Last Amended Judgment: N/A Ross Richardson Defendant’s Attorney Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) Upon motion of ê the defendant í the Director of the Bureau of Prisons í 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, and taking into account the policy statement set forth at USSG §1B1.10 and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), to the extent that they are applicable, IT IS ORDERED that the motion is: ê DENIED. í GRANTED and the defendant’s previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in the last judgment issued) of is reduced to I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE (Prior to Any Departures) Original Offense Level: 29 Amended Offense Level: 23 Criminal History Category: III Criminal History Category: III Original Guideline Range: 120 to 135 months Amended Guideline Range: 120 to 120 months II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE í The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range. í The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the time of sentencing and the reduced sentence is comparably less than the amended guideline range. í The reduced sentence is above the amended guideline range. ê Other (explain): Due to the statutory mandatory minimum sentence required in this case, there is no change in the guideline calculations. III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated June 19, 2006, shall remain in effect. IT IS SO ORDERED. Order Date: March 8, 2012 Effective Date: (if different from order date) Case 5:05-cr-00009-MEO-DCK Document 1439 Filed 03/08/12 Page 1 of 1
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.