United States v. McNeil

78 F. App'x 406
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedOctober 21, 2003
Docket03-20435
StatusUnpublished

This text of 78 F. App'x 406 (United States v. McNeil) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. McNeil, 78 F. App'x 406 (5th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

PER CURIAM. *

Gerald Timothy McNeil (“McNeil”), federal prisoner # 70984-079, appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion to modify his sentence. McNeil was convicted of conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting possession with the intent to distribute cocaine base. McNeil argues that the district court erroneously increased his base offense level for possession of a firearm, and he contends that he was entitled to a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility.

A district court may reduce a term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 when it is based upon a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by an amendment to the Guidelines, if the reduction is consistent with the policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission. United States v. Gonzalez-Balderas, 105 F.3d 981, 982 (5th Cir.1997). Reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is discretionary, and this court reviews a district court’s refusal to lower a defendant’s sentence for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Shaw, 30 F.3d 26, 29 (5th Cir.1994).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying McNeil’s motion because his arguments are outside the scope of a 18 U.S.C. § 3582 motion. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582; United States v. Drath, 89 F.3d 216, 217-18 (5th Cir.1996).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 F. App'x 406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mcneil-ca5-2003.