Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02366/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02366-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael D. Sanders
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-2366

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri

Michael D. Sanders, *

* [Unpublished]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 22, 2004 

Filed: October 26, 2004

___________

Before MELLOY, McMILLIAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Michael D. Sanders, a Missouri prisoner, appeals the final judgment entered

in the District Court1

 for the Western District of Missouri summarily denying

Sanders’s motion to correct his criminal sentence. Sanders pleaded guilty to a drug

offense and was sentenced to 84 months imprisonment (to be served concurrently

with a state sentence) and 6 years supervised release. More than three months after

sentencing, he moved to correct his sentence under Fed. R. Crim. P. 35, or

alternatively to reduce his sentence in accordance with U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(b). We

Appellate Case: 04-2366 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/26/2004 Entry ID: 1826200 
-2-

conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion, as the

court lacked jurisdiction to alter the sentence more than seven days after its

imposition. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a) (within 7 days after sentencing, court may

correct sentence that resulted from arithmetical, technical, or other clear error);

United States v. Austin, 217 F.3d 595, 597 (8th Cir. 2000) (district court has no

jurisdiction to alter sentence more than 7 days after its imposition, even if sentence

was legally erroneous); United States v. Gruenberg, 53 F.3d 214, 215 (8th Cir. 1995)

(per curiam) (standard of review). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a). 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-2366 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/26/2004 Entry ID: 1826200