Motion for Sentence Reduction

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Kris Koglin

Case No.: 15-1943; 15-1946

Officials: POSNER, SYKES, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges

Focus: Motion for Sentence Reduction

Appellant not entitled to sentence reduction despite amendment to sentencing guidelines.

“This argument misunderstands § 1B1.10(b)(1). The phrase “leave all other guideline application decisions unaffected” simply instructs the court to apply only the amendments listed in § 1B1.10(d) and avoid relitigating the factual findings made in the original sentencing decision. The policy statement does not instruct the court to ignore the effect of the amended guideline on other guideline provisions that, in combination, produced the defendant’s sentencing range. As we’ve explained before, “[t]he ‘sentencing range’ that must have been changed to permit relief under § 3582(c)(2) is not the base offense level or any other intermediate step in the guideline calculation, but the bottomline, final range that was the basis for the sentence.” United States v. Taylor, 778 F.3d 667, 672 (7th Cir. 2015). And “[r]elief is not available if a retroactive amendment ‘does not have the effect of lowering the defendant’s applicable guideline range.’” Id. (quoting U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B)).”

Affirmed

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.