Response to Section 3582 Motion - Page 1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

NO.

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

I. Eligibility 

A. The government: 

____ agrees with the probation worksheet’s finding that the defendant is 

ineligible for a sentence reduction and asks the Court to deny the motion. 

____ agrees with the probation worksheet’s finding that the defendant is 

eligible for a sentence reduction. Please see Part II for the government’s 

recommendation as to whether to grant the motion for reduction. 

____ does not agree with the probation worksheet’s findings on the 

defendant’s eligibility for a sentence reduction for the following reasons: 

NDTX FORM D

LUBBOCK DIVISION

5:05-CR-083-C(02)

JUAN ANTHONY REYES

✔

 

 Case 5:05-cr-00083-C Document 92 Filed 02/13/16 Page 1 of 4 PageID 321
Response to Section 3582 Motion - Page 2 

II. Recommendation (prosecutor will complete only if the defendant is eligible 

for a reduction) 

A. If the defendant is eligible, the government: 

i. ____ opposes any reduction. 

ii. ____ does not oppose a reduction, but only to

 ____ the top of the new guideline range. 

 

 ____ the middle of the new guideline range. 

 ____ other: 

 

iii. ____ does not oppose a reduction to the bottom of the defendant’s 

new guideline range, which is the lowest sentence the defendant may 

receive. See USSG § 1B1.10(2)(A). 

iv. ____ does not oppose a reduction to _____ months, which is 

______% below ______ months, the bottom of the new guideline 

range. This is because the defendant’s prior sentence of _____ 

months was ______% below ______ months, the bottom of the 

original range (applicable only if a defendant received a belowguidelines sentence due to a substantial-assistance motion, see

USSG § 1B1.10(b)(2)(B)). 

✔

0

0

0

0

 

 Case 5:05-cr-00083-C Document 92 Filed 02/13/16 Page 2 of 4 PageID 322
Response to Section 3582 Motion - Page 3 

B. If the government checked boxes (i.) or (ii.) above—and therefore opposes 

a full reduction in the defendant’s sentence—the reasons include 

(prosecutor will check one or more): 

 ____ the defendant’s criminal history 

 

 ____ the offense conduct or relevant conduct 

 

 ____ the defendant’s post-sentencing conduct 

 

 ____ other: 

Further explanation of the government’s opposition includes: 

Respectfully submitted, 

SARAH R. SALDAÑA

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

s/________________________________

 

Assistant United States Attorney

Telephone:

✔

✔

Criminal History - At the time the defendant committed the offense in this case, he had one

felony conviction and five misdemeanor convictions. He had been released from prison less

than two years at the time he committed this federal offense. His criminal history category

was VI.

Post-Sentencing Conduct - The defendant has been disciplined while in the custody of the

Bureau of Prisons on this conviction at least five times.

JOHN R. PARKER

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

Denise Williams

DENISE WILLIAMS

Texas Bar No. 02975990

1205 Texas Ave., Ste. 700

Lubbock, TX 79401-40024

806.472.7351

 

 Case 5:05-cr-00083-C Document 92 Filed 02/13/16 Page 3 of 4 PageID 323
Response to Section 3582 Motion - Page 4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing was 

on to 

s/________________________________ 

Assistant United States Attorney

mailed

2/13/16 Juan Anthony Reyes, Reg. No. 31910-177,

FCI Seagoville, P.O. Box 9000, Seagoville, TX 75159.

Denise Williams

DENISE WILLIAMS

 

 Case 5:05-cr-00083-C Document 92 Filed 02/13/16 Page 4 of 4 PageID 324