United States v. Charles Mumphrey
This text of United States v. Charles Mumphrey (United States v. Charles Mumphrey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 26 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-10251
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00455-HDM- PAL-2 v.
CHARLES BO MUMPHREY, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Howard D. McKibben, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 18, 2021**
Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
Charles Bo Mumphrey appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his motion for a sentence reduction under section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Mumphrey contends that the First Step Act allows for a reduction of the
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). sentence imposed in connection with his conviction for interfering with commerce
by robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951, because his career offender
designation was based, in part, on a prior crack cocaine conviction. “Statutory
interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo.” United States v.
Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir. 2021) (internal quotation marks omitted). No
provision of the Act authorizes a sentence reduction in this case. See First Step
Act §§ 401-04. Contrary to his contention, section 404 does not apply to
Mumphrey because his current Hobbs Act robbery conviction is not an offense for
which “the statutory penalties . . . were modified by section 2 or 3 of the Fair
Sentencing Act of 2010.” Id., § 404(a); United States v. Kelley, 962 F.3d 470, 472
(9th Cir. 2020) (discussing scope of Fair Sentencing Act).
Mumphrey’s motions for sentence reduction and relief under the First Step
Act are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 20-10251
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Charles Mumphrey, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-charles-mumphrey-ca9-2021.