United States v. Dale Aldridge

704 F. App'x 611
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedDecember 5, 2017
Docket17-1997
StatusUnpublished

This text of 704 F. App'x 611 (United States v. Dale Aldridge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Dale Aldridge, 704 F. App'x 611 (8th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Dale Aldridge appeals from the order of the District Court 1 denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Following de novo review, we agree with the District Court that Al-dridge was ineligible for the requested sentence reduction based on an amendment to the United States Sentencing Guidelines because his original sentence was derived from the applicable statutory minimum. See United States v. Moore, 734 F.3d 836, 837-38 (8th Cir. 2013). We decline to address Aldridge’s additional pro se arguments, which are raised for the first time on appeal and are unrelated to his sentence-reduction motion. We affirm the judgment and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Craig Moore
734 F.3d 836 (Eighth Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
704 F. App'x 611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-dale-aldridge-ca8-2017.