Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Trice

March 23, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GEORGE E. TRICE, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF SENTENCE

On March 17, 2010, Defendant George E. Trice filed a letter request [Dkt. # 233] for a modification of his sentence, emphasizing the disparity in the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines at the time he was sentenced for criminal acts involving similar amounts of cocaine base and cocaine powder. See generally Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (2007) (discussing the disparity between sentences based on similar amounts of cocaine base and cocaine powder and stating that it is at odds with the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)). The Court has already considered and denied an identical request for a reduction in sentence filed by Defendant in October 2009 [Dkt. # 229, 232]. The request was denied, even though Defendant's guideline range was lower under the revised guidelines, because both statutes under which Defendant was convicted carry statutory minimum sentences that are higher than the revised guideline range. The conspiracy to distribute more than fifty grams of cocaine base charge carries a statutory minimum sentence of ten years in prison, 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 & 841(b)(1)(A)(iii), and the possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime charge carries a statutory minimum sentence of five years to be served consecutive to the drug trafficking sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(I). Accordingly, Defendant's original sentence of 15 years in prison was already the statutory minimum, and cannot be further reduced.

Defendant's letter request does not raise new issues, present new facts, or otherwise raise a "palpable defect" in the Court's earlier determination. E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(h)(3). As a result, it will be denied.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant's request for modification of sentence is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE.

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON United States District Judge

20100323

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.