From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Pritchett

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Western District of New York
Oct 27, 2011
Case No: 04-CR-6157 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2011)

Opinion

Case No: 04-CR-6157 USM No: 12446-055

10-27-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BRANDON PRITCHETT

Mary Beth Covert, A.F.P.D. Defendant's Attorney


Mary Beth Covert, A.F.P.D.

Defendant's Attorney

Date of Previous Judgment or

Last Sentencing Reduction 4/9/09

(Use Date of Last Order of the Court)

Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

Upon motion of X the defendant [] the Director of the Bureau of Prisons [] 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 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:

[] DENIED. X GRANTED and the defendant's previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in the last judgment or sentencing reduction issued) of 84 months is reduced to 70 months I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE (Prior to Any Departures) Previous Offense Level: 25 Amended Offense Level: 23 Criminal History Category: IV Criminal History Category: IV Previous Guideline Range: 84 to 105 months Amended Guideline Range: 70 to 87 months

II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE

X The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range. [] The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the time of sentencing as a result of a departure or Rule 35 reduction, and the reduced sentence is comparably less than the amended guideline range. [] Other (explain): Effective November 1, 2011, the defendant will have served 70 months and 8 days, therefore, the defendant is sentenced to time served and is eligible for immediate release.

III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated 4/9/09 shall remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Hon. Charles J. Siragusa

Printed name and title

Effective Date: November 1, 2011

(if different from order date)


Summaries of

United States v. Pritchett

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Western District of New York
Oct 27, 2011
Case No: 04-CR-6157 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Pritchett

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BRANDON PRITCHETT

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Western District of New York

Date published: Oct 27, 2011

Citations

Case No: 04-CR-6157 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2011)

Citing Cases

UNION CAMP CORPORATION v. DYAL

Earlier Georgia jurisprudence tended to support the conclusion that an agent's authority to convey real…

Stevens v. Stevens

There was no ratification of the offer by the defendant in writing. That written authority was lacking…