Source: http://nc.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180724_0002342.ENC.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2018-12-13 21:28:09
Document Index: 544791560

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2255', '§ 841', '§ 924', '§ 924', '§ 924', '§ 924', '§ 2255', '§ 2255']

REGINALD ORLANDO KELLY, Petitioner,
TERRERENCE W. BOYLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This cause comes before the Court on petitioner's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [DE 38]. The government has moved to dismiss the petition [DE 42], petitioner has responded, and the matter is ripe for disposition. For the reasons discussed below, the government's motion to dismiss is granted and petitioner's motion is dismissed.
On July 10, 2014, petitioner pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to counts two and three of his indictment: possession with the intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841, and possessing and brandishing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). Petitioner was sentenced on November 18, 2014 to a term of 24 months' imprisonment on count two and 84 months' imprisonment on count three, to run consecutively. [DE 36]. Petitioner did not appeal his sentence. On March 26, 2018, petitioner filed the instant motion. Petitioner alleges that the Supreme Court's ruling in Dean v. United States means that his sentence as to count one may be reduced. See Dean v. United States, 137 S.Ct. 1170 (2017). The government has moved to dismiss petitioner's motion on the grounds that it is untimely, that it is procedurally defaulted, that Dean does not provide him any avenue for relief, and that he waived his right to collaterally attack his sentence.
Dean stands generally to reaffirm a sentencing court's discretion in crafting a just and proportional sentence. Dean v. United States, 137 S.Ct. 1170 (2017). Specifically, it deals with the fact that a conviction under § 924(c) carries a mandatory minimum term, and that term must be imposed consecutive to the sentence imposed for the related, underlying offense. Id. at 1174. The Court in Dean held that this mandatory consecutive provision, and its effect on a defendant's entire sentence, can be considered by the sentencing court when sentencing on the other count or counts. Id. at 1176. If the § 924(c) mandatory minimums, which are high-5 years for carrying a firearm, and 7 years if the firearm was brandished-are enough, in the sentencing court's view, to provide a just sentence, then the court has the discretion to vary the sentence for the predicate offenses. Id. at 1177. That sentence can be lowered all the way down to one day, if needed. Id. As that day would still be consecutive to the § 924(c) sentence, the statutory sentencing requirements would be followed. Id.
If Dean provides a new avenue for collateral attack, petitioner here still has no opportunity for relief. When a district court recognizes its power to fashion a just sentence, Dean does not apply, because the problem in Dean was the sentencing court's failure to reckon with its own authority. Here, the Court clearly recognized its authority at sentencing, as defendant was sentenced below his advisory guideline range. Accordingly, Dean does not apply, and petitioner's motion under § 2255 is denied.
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, respondent's motion to dismiss [DE 42] is GRANTED. Petitioner's motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [DE 38] is ...