Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stephen GOLDEN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-11-12
Citations: 470 F. App'x 504
Docket Number: No. 09-1349
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stephen GOLDEN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 470
Pages: 504–504

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stephen GOLDEN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-1349.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 24, 2009.
Decided Nov. 12, 2009.
Amended Nov. 13, 2009.
Daniel L. Bella, Office of the United States Attorney, Hammond, IN, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
John E. Martin, Indiana Federal Community Defenders, Inc., Hammond, IN, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge, JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge, DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
AMENDED ORDER
A § 3582(c)(2) request for sentence modification is discretionary, United States v. Cunningham, 554 F.3d 703, 707 (7th Cir.2009), even for defendant Stephen Golden whose Guideline range was lowered to 360 months to life from a range of life. And despite Golden's argument to the contrary, a district judge is permitted to leave a sentence alone, id., which is what the judge did in Golden's case. The district judge did not abuse his discretion in handling Golden's § 3582(c)(2) motion, especially in light of Golden's admitted incidents of prison misconduct. And, like his decision whether to grant a sentence reduction, the district judge's decision not to conduct a hearing is committed to his discretion. United States v. Young, 555 F.3d 611, 615 (7th Cir.2009).
AFFIRMED.