2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 7-22-2009 

# U SA v . F ahim M uh ammed P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-3912

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . F ahim M uh amme d " (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 967. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/967CL D- 2 2 9 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 08- 3912

___________ UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v . F AHI M M UHAMM E D,

A ppel l ant

__________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o rth e D i s tr i c to f

N e w J e r s e y ( D . N . J . C r i m . N o. 90- cr - 00304) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e St anl eyR . C hes l er

____________________________________ Subm i t t ed forPoss i bl e Sum m aryA ct i on P u rs u a n t to T h ir d C ir c u it L A R 2 7 .4 a n d I.O .P . 1 0 .6

J une 25, 2009 B efor e: R E N D E L L , H A R D I M A N and N Y G A A R D , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: J ul y22, 2009)

_________ OP I NI ON

_________ P E R C UR I AM Fahi m M uhamm ed, a fe der al pr i s onerpr ocee di ng pr o s e, appea l s an or derof the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rtfo r th e D istri ct of N ew Jerse yd en y ing h is m o ti o n fo r a r educt i on i n s ent ence pur s uantt o 18 U . S. C . § 3582( c) and an or derdeny i ng hi s m ot i onT he U ni t ed St at es Sent enci ng C om m i s s i on adopt ed A m endment382 on N ovember1, 1 1991, w hi ch adde d s ubs ect i on ( f) t o § 4A 1. 1. Sect i on 4A 1. 1( f) r equi r es the addi t i on of one poi ntforeac h pr i ors ent ence thatdi d notr ece i ve anypoi nt s under§ 4A 1. 1( a) , ( b) , or 2 f o rr e c o n s i d e r a t i o n a n d mo t i o n t o c o rr e c tth e r e c o r d a n d / o rj u d g me n t . W e wi l l a f f i r m. In 1 9 9 1 , M u h a m m e d w a s c o n v icte d in f e d e ra l co u rt o f

c o n sp ira c yto d istrib u te her oi n. H e w as s ent ence d t o 264 m onths i n pr i s on. M uhamm ed’ s s ent ence w as bas ed on a cr i m i nal hi s t orys cor e of s i x, w hi ch i ncl uded tw o poi nt s underU . S. S. G . § 4A 1. 1( d) for h is c o m m is s io n o f

th e o f f e n s e w h ile u n d e r p a ro le s u p e rv is io n , o n e p o in t u n d e r U .S .S .G . § 4A 1. 1( e) forhi s comm i s s i on of the off ens e w i thi n tw o y ear s of bei ng r el eas ed fr om p ri s o n , a n d th re e p o in ts u n d e r U .S .S .G . § 4 A 1 .1 (a ) f o r f o u r p ri o r b a n k ro b b e ri e s . A lth o u g h a c ri m inal h ist o rysco re o f six p lace d M u h am m ed in crim inal h ist o ryca tego ry I I I , the s ent enci ng courtagr eed w i th the G overnm entthatan upw ar d departur e w as w a rr a n te d to a d e q u a te ly re f le c t th e s e ri o u s n e s s o f

M u h a m m e d ’s c ri m in a l h is to ry. M uhamm ed w as pl ace d i n cr i m i nal hi s t orycat egoryV I , w hi ch had a gui del i ne r ange of 235 t o 293 m onths . I n 1993, w e af fi r m ed the j udgm entof s ent ence . M uhamm ed l at er uns ucce s s ful l ym oved t o vaca t e hi s s ent ence pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 2255. In 2 0 0 8 , M u h a m m e d f

ile d a m o tio n to re d u c e h is s e n te n c e p u rs u a n t to 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 8 2 (c ). M u h a m m e d a rg u e d th a t h is s e n ten c e sh o u ld b e re d u c e d p u rsu a n t to A m endment709 t o U . S. S. G . § 4A 1. 1( f) , w hi ch bec ame effe ct i ve N ovember1, 2007, and ch an g ed the w aythat m u lt iple p ri o r sen tenc es a re c o u n ted in ca lculati n g crim inal h ist o ry sco res. T h e D istri ct C o u rtco n clud ed that M u h am m ed w as n o t el igible f o r reli ef u n d er 1( c) . A m endment382, w hi ch w as noti n eff ectw hen M uhamm ed’ s offe ns e occ urr ed, w as n o t app li ed in co m p u ti n g M u h am m ed ’s sen tenc e. Itap p ea rs th at th e se n tenc ing co u rt im p licitlya g re e d w ith th e G o v e rn m e n t th a t th e a p p lica tio n o f A m e n d m e n t 3 8 2 w o u ld v io late th e E x P o st F a c to C lau se . A m e n d m e n t 7 0 9 re v ise d § 4 A 1 .1 (f ) a n d a d d re ss e d in parthow m ul t i pl e pr i ors ent ence s s houl d be count ed. A lth o u g h th e m o tio n f

o r re c o n sid e ra tio n w a s n o t d o c k e ted u n til A u g u st 1 8 , 2 0 0 8 , itis 2 dated the sam e date as M uh am m ed’s R ule 36 m oti on – M ay19 , 20 08 . W e deem these m o tio n s, su b m itt e d w ith in 1 0 d a y s o f th e D istric t C o u rt’s M a y1 2 , 2 0 0 8 , o rd e r, ti m e ly fi l ed. See Local C r i m i nal R ul e 1. 1 of U . S. D i s tr i ctC our tR ul es forthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s ey( pr ovi di ng thatL ocal C i vi l R ul e 7. 1( i ) , w hi ch af for ds 10 day s t o fi l e a mot i on for rec o n side rati o n , ap p li es in crim inal ca ses). 3 § 3 5 8 2 (c) b ec au se A m en d m en t 70 9 is no t l ist ed in U . S . S . G . § 1 B 1 . 1 0 (c), an d reli ef u n d er § 3582( c) i s onl yauthor i zed f oramendm ent s s o l i s t ed. T he D i s tr i ctC our tal s o r ej ect ed M uh am m ed’s ar gu m ent that A m end m ent 709 a pp l i es r et roact i velybecau se i ti s a c lar if y in g , as o p p o se d to a su b sta n tiv e , am e n d m e n t. M uhamm ed then fi l ed a mot i on forr econs i der at i on of the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s or der and a mot i on t o corr ectthe r ecor d and/ orj udgm entpur s uantt o Feder al R ul e of Cri m i nal Pr ocedur e 36. T he D i s tr i ctC our tdeni ed M uhamm ed’ s m ot i on forr econs i der at i on, 2 e x p lain in g th a t h e h a d n o t se t f o rth a c h a n g e in c o n tro lli n g leg a l au th o rityo r p re v io u sly u n a v a ilab le e v id e n c e , n o r h a d h e sh o w n th a t re c o n sid e ra tio n w a s n e c e ss a ryto c o rre c t a c le a r e rr o r o f

la w o r t o p re v e n t m a n if e s t in ju s tic e . T he D i s tr i ctC our tgr ant ed i n partand deni ed i n partM uhamm ed’ s R ul e 36 m ot i on, i n w hi ch M uhamm ed ar gued thatthe D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s opi ni on cont ai ned s ever al err oneous s t at ement s . T he D i s tr i ctC our tgr ant ed M uhamm ed’ s m ot i on t o the ext enthe s oughtt o r emove a s t at ementi n t he bac kgr ound s ect i on of the opi ni on pr ovi di ng thatt he4

s ent enci ng j udge ac know l edged thatappl i cat i on of the A m endment382 w oul d vi ol at e the E x PostFact o C l aus e. T he D i s tr i ctC our tagr eed thatthe s ent enci ng j udge di d notm ake s u c h a s t a t e me n t , b u tn o t e d th a tth e r e mo v a l o f th e s t a t e me n td i d n o tc h a n g e th e o u t c o me of M uhamm ed’ s § 3582 m ot i on. T h e D istric t C o u rt d isa g re e d w ith M u h a m m e d th a t ith a d e rre d in re f e rrin g to h is pr i orbank r obber i es as arm ed, expl ai ni ng thati thad r el i ed on the fi ndi ng of the s ent enci ng court . T he D i s tr i ctC our tal s o r ej ect ed M uhamm ed’ s cont ent i ons thati thad err ed i n s t at i ng i n i t s opi ni on thatthe appl i cat i on of the amended gui del i nes w oul d have s ubj ect ed hi m t o a l ongers ent ence orthathe had a r gued on appe al thatthe s ent enci ng j ud ge im properl yi m po sed t he u pw ard dep arture. M uh am m ed ap peals the d enial of h i s § 3582 m ot i on, hi s m ot i on forr econs i der at i on, and hi s R ul e 36 mot i on. W e a g ree w ith the D istri ct C o u rtthat M u h am m ed is no t el igible f o r reli ef u n d er § 3 5 8 2 b a se d o n A m e n d m e n t 7 0 9 . A s e x p lain e d b yth e D istric t C o u rt, i n the ca s e of a defe ndantw ho has been s ent ence d t o a t erm of i m pr i s onm entbas ed on a s ent enci ng r ange thathas s ubs equent l ybeen lo w e re d b yth e S e n te n c in g C o m m is s io n p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 9 9 4 (o ) . . . th e c o u rt m a yre d u c e th e ter m o f im p riso n m e n t . . . if s u c h a re d u c tio n is cons i s t entw i th appl i cabl e pol i cys t at ement s i s s ued bythe Sent enci ng C o m m is s io n . 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 8 2 (c )( 2 ); U n ite d S ta te s v . W is e , 5 1 5 F .3 d 2 0 7 , 2 2 0 -2 1 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 8 ). U nderthe appl i cabl e pol i cys t at ement , a r educt i on i n the t erm of i m pr i s onm enti s not cons i s t entand notauthor i zed i f none of the amendm ent s l i s t ed i n U . S. S. G . § 1B 1. 10( c) a p p lies to th e d e f

e n d a n t. U .S .S .G . § 1 B 1 .1 0 (a )(2 ). A m e n d m e n t 7 0 9 is n o t li ste d inW e n o te th at M u h am m ed ’s prim aryarg u m en t app ea rs t o b e tha t th e se n tenc ing co u rt 3 e rre d in f a ili n g to a p p lyA m e n d m e n t 3 8 2 , w h ich h a d b e e n a d o p ted a t th e tim e o f h is s ent enci ng. T hi s ar gum enti s notpr oper l yr ai s ed i n a § 3582 mot i on. I n addi t i on, the 1 9 9 9 tra n sc rip t re late d to M u h a m m e d ’s § 2 2 5 5 p ro c e e d in g s, a p a rtial c o p yo f w h ich is a tta c h e d to h is § 3 5 8 2 m o tio n , re f le c ts th a t h e ra is e d th is a rg u m e n t in th o s e p ro c e e d in g s .

5 U .S .S .G . § 1 B 1 .1 0 (c ). T h u s , a re d u c tio n in s e n te n c e is n o t a u th o ri z e d u n d e r § 3 5 8 2 (c ). T he D i s tr i ctC our tcorr ect l ys t at ed thatw hetherA m endment709 i s a cl ar i fy i ng or subst anti ve am end m ent i s not r el evan tfor pu rposes of § 3 58 2(c) . T he D i stri ctC ou rtal so pr oper l ydeni ed, forthe r eas ons s t at ed i n i t s opi ni on, M uhamm ed’ s m ot i on for r econs i der at i on and R ul e 36 mot i on. 3 B eca us e thi s appea l does notr ai s e a s ubs t ant i al ques t i on, w e w i l l aff i r m the or der o f th e D istric t C o u rt.