United States v. Jerrold Hammer

459 F. App'x 584
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedApril 25, 2012
Docket11-3550
StatusUnpublished

This text of 459 F. App'x 584 (United States v. Jerrold Hammer) 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. Jerrold Hammer, 459 F. App'x 584 (8th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

*585 PER CURIAM.

Jerrold Hammer appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a reduction of his revocation sentence. We agree with the court that Hammer was not eligible for a reduction. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, comment. (n.5(A)) (2011); United States v. Morales, 590 F.3d 1049, 1052-53 (9th Cir.2010); United States v. Fontenot, 583 F.3d 743, 744-45 (10th Cir.2009); United States v. Forman, 553 F.3d 585, 588-89 (7th Cir.2009) (per curiam). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, 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. Fontenot
583 F.3d 743 (Tenth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Forman
553 F.3d 585 (Seventh Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Morales
590 F.3d 1049 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
459 F. App'x 584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jerrold-hammer-ca8-2012.