UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Untied States of America,

Plaintiff,

v.

Daniel Keror,

Defendant.

 /

Case No. 09-20245

Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF TERM OF

IMPRISONMENT [76]

This matter came before the Court on Defendant Daniel Keror’s motion for reduction

of term of imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). (Dkt. 76.) 

On June 4, 2009, the grand jury indicted Defendant Daniel Keror with violations of 21

U.S.C. 846, 841(a)(1), conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribute a

controlled substance, and 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), possession with intent to distribute a

controlled substance. (Dkt. 21.) The controlled substance indicated in the indictment was

ecstasy. (Id.) 

On October 21, 2009, Defendant pleaded guilty to both charges against him. On April

27, 2010, the Court sentenced Defendant to 97 months. (Dkt. 69.) 

On March 21, 2014, Defendant filed this motion. (Dkt. 76.) Defendant argues that the

authority he points to entitles his to a reduction in his sentence. 

Because the Court finds that Defendant is not entitled to the relief that he requests,

for the authority he points to applies solely to crack cocaine, and not ecstasy, for which

Defendant was indicted, the Court DENIES Defendant’s motion.

2:09-cr-20245-NGE-DAS Doc # 81 Filed 04/30/14 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 531
Defendant argues that 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), United States Sentencing Guideline

1B1.10, and the Sentencing Guideline Amendments 750 and 759 should persuade the

Court to reduce Defendant’s sentence. But, as the Government points out, that authority

applies solely to crack cocaine offenses. (Dkt. 80.) Defendant has not submitted any

authority that the Sentencing Commission has intended to reduce any sentences for

ecstacy-related offenses.

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) provides that a court may reduce a defendant’s term of

imprisonment when the Sentencing Commission has lowered the sentencing range on

which a court based the sentence. 

United States Sentencing Guideline § 1B1.10 also provides the means by which a

court may reduce a sentence if a guideline range applicable to the defendant has been

lowered. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 Reduction in Term of Imprisonment as a Result of Amended

Guideline Range (Policy Statement).1 But “[a] reduction in the defendant’s term of

imprisonment is not consistent with this policy statement and is therefore not authorized

under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) if–(A) none of the amendments listed in subsection (c) is

applicable to the defendant[.]” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2). Subsection (c) lists the covered

amendments, which includes Amendment 750. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c). 

Amendment 750 implemented statutory directives to the Sentencing Commission to

reduce the penalties for cocaine base offenses, eliminated the statutory mandatory

 1“In a case in which a defendant is serving a term of imprisonment, and the guideline

range applicable to that defendant has subsequently been lowered as a result of an

amendment to the Guidelines manual listed in subsection (c) below, the court may reduce

the defendant’s term of imprisonment as provided by 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). As required

by 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), any such reduction in the defendant’s term of imprisonment

shall be consistent with this policy statement.” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(1).

2

2:09-cr-20245-NGE-DAS Doc # 81 Filed 04/30/14 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 532
minimum sentence for simple possession of crack cocaine, and required the Sentencing

Commission to review and amend the sentencing guidelines to account for specified

aggravating and mitigating circumstances in certain drug cases.2 U.S. Sentencing

Guidelines Manual app. C (2013). Amendment 759, which Defendant also states entitles

him to an imprisonment reduction, amends various parts of § 1B1.10. Id. The Court has

reviewed this amendment and finds that it does not substantively affect Defendant's rights

or sentence.

Given that Defendant has not provided authority, nor has the Court independently

found any authority, that shows that Defendant is entitled to an imprisonment reduction for

his ecstasy-related sentence, the Court DENIES Defendant's motion for reduction.

So ordered.

s/Nancy G. Edmunds 

Nancy G. Edmunds

United States District Judge

Dated: April 30, 2014

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on April 30, 2014, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Carol J. Bethel 

Case Manager

 2See also United States v. Dennison, 538 F. App’x 226, 226-27 (3d Cir. 2013) (noting

that Amendment 750 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, effective November 1,

2011, lowered base offense levels application to offenses involving crack cocaine.). 

3

2:09-cr-20245-NGE-DAS Doc # 81 Filed 04/30/14 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 533