Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-01-26
Citations: 364 F. App'x 243
Docket Number: No. 09-2323
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge, TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge, DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 364
Pages: 243–243

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-2323.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Jan. 26, 2010.
Joshua P. Kolar, Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Hammond, IN, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
John E. Martin, Attorney, Indiana Federal Community Defenders, Inc., Hammond, IN, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge, TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge, DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge.
Defendant Kenneth Johnson stipulated that oral argument was unnecessary, and the United States did not object. We agree. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
ORDER
Kenneth Johnson received a two-level sentence reduction under Amendments 706 and 711 to the Sentencing Guidelines, which the Sentencing Commission has declared to be retroactive. Johnson would like a reduction greater than the two levels permitted under the amended guidelines, but his position is foreclosed by United States v. Cunningham, 554 F.3d 703 (7th Cir.2009), where we held that district courts lack the authority to impose sentences below the minimum amended guidelines range when ruling on sentencing reductions under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).
The Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in United States v. Dillon, 572 F.3d 146 (3d Cir.2009), cert. granted, — U.S. —, 130 S.Ct. 797, — L.Ed.2d —(2009), which will address the issue Johnson raises. We therefore hold Johnson's appeal until the decision in Dillon.