United States v. Darnell Norton
This text of 669 F. App'x 329 (United States v. Darnell Norton) 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.
Opinion
Darnell Michael Norton appeals after the district court 1 denied his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a sentence reduction, as it adequately examined the sentencing factors and public safety concerns, and ex *330 plained its reasoning. See United States v. Long, 757 F.3d 762, 768 (8th Cir. 2014) (abuse-of-discretion review of discretionary decision whether to grant authorized § 3582(c)(2) modification); see also United States v. Curry, 584 F.3d 1102, 1103-05 (8th Cir. 2009) (district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to reduce defendant’s sentence under § 3582(c)(2) due to defendant’s criminal history).
The judgment is affirmed and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northem District of Iowa.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
669 F. App'x 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-darnell-norton-ca8-2016.