United States v. Ronnie Benson

Eighth Circuit

United States v. Ronnie Benson

329 F. App'x 37

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJuly 9, 2009

Docket08-2904

StatusUnpublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 329 F. App'x 37 (United States v. Ronnie Benson) 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. Ronnie Benson, 329 F. App'x 37 (8th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ronnie Benson appeals following the district court’s 1 orders reducing his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and denying reconsideration. We affirm.

In 1997, a jury found Benson guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to dis *38 tribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841. The district court sentenced him to a total of 360 months in prison (the bottom of the Guidelines range of 360 months to life) and 5 years of supervised release. We affirmed the conviction and sentence. See United States v. Sanders, Nos. 97-3782/3856, 1998 WL 796101, at *1 (8th Cir. Nov.16, 1998) (unpublished per curiam).

In June 2008, Benson filed a counseled motion to reduce his sentence based on Amendment 706 to the Guidelines, which retroactively reduced base offense levels for crack offenses. The government indicated that it did not object to imposition of a sentence at the bottom of the revised sentencing range of 292-365 months. The district court granted Benson’s motion and reduced his 360-month prison sentence to 292 months. In a pro se motion to reconsider, Benson challenged his counsel’s failure to object to the drug-quantity calculations in his presentence report. The district court denied the motion.

We have considered Benson’s arguments on appeal, and we find no grounds for reversal. See United States v. Starks, 551 F.3d 839, 841-43 (8th Cir.2009) (discussing narrow scope of sentence reductions under § 3582(c), and inapplicability of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005)), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 2746, 174 L.Ed.2d 257 (2009) (No. 08-9839). As to Benson’s complaint about his counsel, we note that there is no right to counsel in a section 3582(c)(2) proceeding. See United States v. Brown, 565 F.3d 1093, 1094 (8th Cir.2009) (per curiam).

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and Benson’s motion to supplement, and we affirm the judgment of the district court.

1

. The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

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

PER CURIAM.

Ronnie Benson appeals following the district court’s 1 orders reducing his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and denying reconsideration. We affirm.

In 1997, a jury found Benson guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to dis *38 tribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841. The district court sentenced him to a total of 360 months in prison (the bottom of the Guidelines range of 360 months to life) and 5 years of supervised release. We affirmed the conviction and sentence. See United States v. Sanders, Nos. 97-3782/3856, 1998 WL 796101, at *1 (8th Cir. Nov.16, 1998) (unpublished per curiam).

In June 2008, Benson filed a counseled motion to reduce his sentence based on Amendment 706 to the Guidelines, which retroactively reduced base offense levels for crack offenses. The government indicated that it did not object to imposition of a sentence at the bottom of the revised sentencing range of 292-365 months. The district court granted Benson’s motion and reduced his 360-month prison sentence to 292 months. In a pro se motion to reconsider, Benson challenged his counsel’s failure to object to the drug-quantity calculations in his presentence report. The district court denied the motion.

We have considered Benson’s arguments on appeal, and we find no grounds for reversal. See United States v. Starks, 551 F.3d 839, 841-43 (8th Cir.2009) (discussing narrow scope of sentence reductions under § 3582(c), and inapplicability of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005)), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 2746, 174 L.Ed.2d 257 (2009) (No. 08-9839). As to Benson’s complaint about his counsel, we note that there is no right to counsel in a section 3582(c)(2) proceeding. See United States v. Brown, 565 F.3d 1093, 1094 (8th Cir.2009) (per curiam).

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and Benson’s motion to supplement, and we affirm the judgment of the district court.

1

. The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

329 F. App'x 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ronnie-benson-ca8-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack