Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-02057/USCOURTS-ca10-92-02057-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 

---

UNITED 

v. 

CHARLES 

FI ,L, 1~ I) 

UNITED STATES COURT OF 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

Unttett PJ~ t.J !,· f~1:_r.•~ ,-.r ~~~r.rc~t~ 

APPEALS , "'t 1 .. • 

STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) 

) 

) 

) 

CAREY COOK, ) 

) 

Defendant-Appellant. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

AUG 18 1992 

ROBERT L. HOEC!(E. P Clerk . • ,.., 

No. 92-2057 

(D.C. No. CR-89-204 JB) 

(D. New Mexico) 

Before LOGAN, BARRETT and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously to honor the parties' request for a 

decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 

Defendant Charles Carey Cook appeals the denial of his motion 

for correction of his sentence under 28 u.s.c. S 2255. The only 

issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in ruling that he 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppal. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 92-2057 Document: 010110276761 Date Filed: 08/18/1992 Page: 1
could not reduce defendant's sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(l) 

because of defendant's outstanding record of military service. 

Section 924(c)(l) requires a five year enhancement of a drug 

sentence for use of a dange~ous weapon in connection with a drug 

crime. The statute requires that 

[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, the court 

shall not place on probation or suspend the sentence of 

any person convicted of a violation of this subsection, 

nor shall the term of imprisonment imposed under this 

subsection run concurrently with any other term of 

imprisonment including that imposed for the crime of 

violence or drug trafficking crime in which the firearm 

was used or carried. 

The district court apparently did reduce defendant's sentence 

on the underlying substantive crime for his exemplary military 

record, but did not do so on the five year enhancement because the 

judge believed he had no power to do so. In that respect the 

judge quite correctly read the clear mandatory terms of the statute. See United States v. Hatch, 925 F.2d 362, 363 (10th Cir. 

1991) (referring to§ 924(c) sentences as mandatory) . The district court's authority to depart downward from a statutory minimum sentence is limited to the circumstances provided for in 18 

U.S.C. § 3553(e) and requires a motion by the government. United 

States v. Horn, 946 F.2d 738, 745 (10th Cir. 1991); see also 

United States v. Tannis, 942 F.2d 196, 198 (3d Cir. 1991). 

AFFIRMED. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-2-

Entered for the Court 

James K. Logan 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 92-2057 Document: 010110276761 Date Filed: 08/18/1992 Page: 2