Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-13-50746/USCOURTS-ca5-13-50746-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Antoine Earl Powell
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-50746

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANTOINE EARL POWELL,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 6:05-CR-219-1

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Antoine Earl Powell, federal prisoner # 56375-180, seeks leave to proceed 

in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the district court’s denial of his motion 

to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). By moving to proceed 

IFP, Powell is challenging the district court’s certification decision that his 

appeal was not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 

(5th Cir. 1997).

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 6, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-50746 Document: 00512489848 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/06/2014
No. 13-50746

In 2006, Powell was convicted of aiding and abetting the possession with 

intent to distribute at least 50 grams of crack cocaine (count one) and aiding 

and abetting the possession of a firearm during the commission of a drugtrafficking crime (count two). He was sentenced to 151 months on count one, 

to run consecutively to a 60-month sentence on count two. Powell’s sentence 

was subsequently reduced, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c), to the statutory 

minimum of 120 months.

Powell contends that the provisions of the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA), 

which amended the amounts of crack needed to trigger statutory minimum 

sentences, should retroactively apply to him. The district court lacked 

authority to reduce his sentence below the statutory minimum sentence of 10 

years. See United States v. Carter, 595 F.3d 575, 578-81 (5th Cir. 2010). His 

argument that he is entitled to a reduction in light of the FSA is without merit. 

Cf. Dorsey v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2321, 2335-36 (2012) (“[I]n federal 

sentencing the ordinary practice is to apply new penalties to defendants not 

yet sentenced.”). Powell fails to demonstrate a nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

Accordingly, his motion for leave to proceed IFP is denied, and the appeal 

is dismissed as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

Because Powell has previously raised the same frivolous arguments in other 

§ 3582(c)(2) motions and appeals, he is warned that frivolous, repetitive, or 

otherwise abusive filings in the future will invite the imposition of sanctions, 

including dismissal, monetary sanctions, and/or restrictions on his ability to 

file pleadings in this court and any other court subject to this court’s 

jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IFP 

DENIED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

2

 Case: 13-50746 Document: 00512489848 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/06/2014