United States v. McMullen

Eighth Circuit

United States v. McMullen

355 F. App'x 970

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedDecember 10, 2009

DocketNo. 09-1489

StatusPublished

This text of 355 F. App'x 970 (United States v. McMullen) 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. McMullen, 355 F. App'x 970 (8th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Owen McMullen appeals the district court’s¹ order denying his motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 706 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s decision not to reduce McMullen’s sentence, as the court had considered the amended Guidelines range at McMullen’s request when he was sentenced, although the amendment was not yet in effect. See U.S.S.G. § lB1.10(b)(l) (in determining whether reduction is warranted, court should determine amended Guidelines range that would have been applicable if amended Guidelines had been in effect); United States v. Curry, 584 F.3d 1102, 1103-1104 (8th Cir.2009) (standard of review).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, and counsel is granted leave to withdraw.

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

PER CURIAM.

Owen McMullen appeals the district court’s¹ order denying his motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 706 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s decision not to reduce McMullen’s sentence, as the court had considered the amended Guidelines range at McMullen’s request when he was sentenced, although the amendment was not yet in effect. See U.S.S.G. § lB1.10(b)(l) (in determining whether reduction is warranted, court should determine amended Guidelines range that would have been applicable if amended Guidelines had been in effect); United States v. Curry, 584 F.3d 1102, 1103-1104 (8th Cir.2009) (standard of review).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, and counsel is granted leave to withdraw.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

355 F. App'x 970, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mcmullen-ca8-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack