United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF
Corbett O'Meara United States District Judge
matter came before the court on defendant Terrence Lamar
Tyler's Motion for Reduction of Sentence Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c). The government filed a response. No
reply was filed, and no oral argument was heard.
Tyler moves for a reduction in his sentence based on an
amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines which amended the Drug
Quantity Table at U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c) by lowering the
base offense level by two levels for specific drug
quantities. These amendments were made retroactive effective
November 1, 2015, through U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(d) and (e).
speaking, once a court has imposed a sentence, it does not
have the authority to change or modify that sentence unless
such authority is expressly granted by statute.”
United States v. Curry, 606 F.3d 323, 326
(6th Cir. 2010). To determine whether a defendant
is eligible for a resentencing, “(1) the defendant
[must] ha[ve] been sentenced to a term of imprisonment based
on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by
the Sentencing Commission: and (2) such reduction [must be]
consistent with applicable policy statement issued by the
Sentencing Commission.” United States v.
Riley, 726 F.3d 756, 758 (6th Cir. 2013). If
eligible, “[t]he court may then consider whether the
authorized reduction is warranted, either in whole or in
party, according to the factors set forth in §
3553(a).” United States v. Thompson, 714 F.3d
946, 949 (6th Cir. 2013).
determine whether a sentence was based on a
“subsequently lowered guideline range, ” a court
must “consider whether the original sentence was, if
fact, based on such a range.” United States v.
Hameed, 614 F.3d 259, 264 (6th Cir. 2010).
“A district judge's mere calculation of the
sentencing range under § 2D1.1 does not render a
defendant's sentence ‘based on' the crack
guidelines range if that range is subsequently trumped by
another provision of the guidelines.” Id. at
case defendant Tyler moves this court for a reduction in his
sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c), based upon the
retroactive change to the base offense level for cocaine
offenses. However, Tyler was not sentenced under the cocaine
guidelines; rather, he was sentenced as a career offender.
The Sentencing Commission has not lowered the sentencing
range for career offenders. See United States v.
Webb, 760 F.3d 513, 519 (6th Cir. 2014)
(holding defendant ineligible for reduction in sentence
because his original sentence was based on application of
career offender guidelines, which have not been lowered by
any amendments to the Guidelines). Accordingly, defendant
Tyler has not met the eligibility requirements for a
reduction of his sentence.
hereby ORDERED that defendant Tyler's
motion for ...