Source: http://tn.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20150427_0000401.ETN.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2017-01-16 12:50:55
Document Index: 651224382

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 3582', '§ 3582', '§ 1', '§ 5', '§ 3553', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1']

| United States v. Lunsford
UNITED STATES OF AMERICAv.KENNETH R. LUNSFORD
This criminal case is before the court on the defendant's motion for sentence reduction [doc. 339]. Through counsel, the defendant asks the court to resentence him pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and in accordance with Amendments 782 and 788 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual ("U.S.S.G."). The government has responded [doc. 343], deferring to the court's discretion whether and to what extent to grant any such reduction, subject to the limitations of 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10.
By judgment dated February 8, 2012, this court sentenced the defendant to a term of imprisonment of 72 months as to Count One (conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine). The defendant's guideline range was 84 to 105 months (total offense level 23, criminal history category V). Count One was subject to a 60-month statutory mandatory minimum.
Prior to sentencing, the United States filed a motion for downward departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1. The court granted that motion in imposing the 72-month sentence, a reduction of 14 percent from the bottom of the guideline range. According to the Bureau of Prisons, the defendant is presently scheduled for release on October 1, 2016.
Applying Amendment 782, the defendant's new guideline range is 70 to 87 months, based on a total offense level of 21 and a criminal history category of V. Thus, the defendant was originally sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission.
A corresponding 14 percent 5K1.1 reduction from the bottom of the new guideline range would result in a term of 60 months' imprisonment. The defendant remains subject to a 60-month statutory mandatory minimum because no 28 U.S.C. § 3553(e) motion was filed in this case.
The court has considered the filings and the relevant 3553(a) factors. Additionally, the court has considered the danger to the public as the result of any reduction in the defendant's sentence, the seriousness of the defendant's offense, the defendant's post-sentencing conduct, and the need to protect the public. See id. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(B)(ii). Having done so, the court finds that the defendant should be granted a sentence reduction.
For the reasons stated herein, the defendant's motion [doc. 339] is GRANTED. The defendant's term of imprisonment is reduced to 60 months. If this sentence is less than the amount of time the defendant has already served, the sentence shall instead be reduced to "time served." See id. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(C).
Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated February 8, 2012, shall remain in effect. The effective date of this order is November 2, 2015. See id. § 1B1.10(e)(1).