United States v. Wanton

525 F.3d 621, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 9717, 2008 WL 1959259
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMay 7, 2008
Docket08-1813
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 525 F.3d 621 (United States v. Wanton) 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. Wanton, 525 F.3d 621, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 9717, 2008 WL 1959259 (8th Cir. 2008).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Chucky Wanton appeals from the district court’s 1 denial of his motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (U.S.S.G.), which reduced certain base offense levels in *622 U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(c) depending on the quantity of cocaine base (crack) involved.

Wanton pled guilty to distributing a controlled substance, namely more than 50 grams of crack, and was sentenced to 135 months imprisonment. Judgment was entered on September 25, 2006. In December 2007 Wanton filed a motion to reduce his sentence, citing Amendment 706. The district court denied the motion, and Wanton appeals.

Wanton’s sentence was based on a finding that his relevant conduct involved more than 4.5 kilograms of crack, and the new amendment does not apply where more than 4.5 kilograms of crack is involved. U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 cmt. n. 10(D)(ii). Because of the amount of drugs Wanton was involved with, his offense level would not change, his guideline range would not be lowered, and his original sentence is unaffected by the amendments. See U.S.S.G. § lB1.10(a)(2)(B).

Accordingly, the district court’s order denying relief pursuant to the guideline amendments is summarily affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

1

. The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.

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

Related

United States v. Cleveland Johnson
406 F. App'x 95 (Eighth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Tyrone Davis
341 F. App'x 255 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)
Bowman v. United States
629 F. Supp. 2d 318 (S.D. New York, 2009)
United States v. Ailsworth, Jr.
325 F. App'x 658 (Tenth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Evans
Tenth Circuit, 2009
United States v. Jones
548 F.3d 1366 (Eleventh Circuit, 2008)
United States v. Johnny Woodson
280 F. App'x 568 (Eighth Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
525 F.3d 621, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 9717, 2008 WL 1959259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-wanton-ca8-2008.