United States v. David Lee Anderson

399 F. App'x 125
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedNovember 4, 2010
Docket10-2371
StatusUnpublished

This text of 399 F. App'x 125 (United States v. David Lee Anderson) 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. David Lee Anderson, 399 F. App'x 125 (8th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

David Lee Anderson appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his motions to recalculate and reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 709 to the Sentencing Guidelines. Upon de novo review, we find no error. See United States v. Baylor, 556 F.3d 672, 673 (8th Cir.2009) (per curiam) (standard of review); United States v. Peters, 524 F.3d 905, 907 (8th Cir.2008) (per curiam) (affirming denial of § 3582(c)(2) motion for resentencing because Amendment 709 is not a covered amendment under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 to which retroactive treatment may be given); United States v. Walsh, 26 F.3d 75, 76-77 (8th Cir.1994) (noting that policy statements in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 govern whether Guidelines amendments shall apply retroactively). Anderson’s alternative argument for recalculation is also without merit. Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.

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

Related

United States v. Thomas Michael Walsh, Jr.
26 F.3d 75 (Eighth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Peters
524 F.3d 905 (Eighth Circuit, 2008)
United States v. Baylor
556 F.3d 672 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
399 F. App'x 125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-david-lee-anderson-ca8-2010.