United States v. Jerrold Hammer

459 F. App'x 584
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided April 25, 2012·No. 11-3550·Unpublished

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

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

459 F. App'x 584 (United States v. Jerrold Hammer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)