United States v. DeVaughn Lee
This text of 638 F. App'x 555 (United States v. DeVaughn Lee) 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
DeVaughn Lee appeals after the district court 1 denied him a sentence reduction *556 under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). In declining to reduce Lee’s sentence, the district court found that a reduction was not warranted in light of the conduct violations incurred during his incarceration and his conduct during the offense. We conclude that there is no basis for reversal, as the district court’s finding that a reduction was not warranted was not an abuse of discretion. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 827, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (Section 3582(c) authorizes district court to reduce sentence by applying amended Guidelines range as if it were in effect at time of original sentencing, and leaving all other Guidelines determinations intact as previously determined); United States v. Long, 757 F.3d 762, 763 (8th Cir.2014) (de novo review of whether § 3582(c)(2) authorizes modification, and abuse-of-discretion review of decision whether to grant authorized § 3582(c)(2) modification); 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 request to withdraw is granted.
. The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
638 F. App'x 555, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-devaughn-lee-ca8-2016.