Opinion ID: 145279
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Parties’ Responses

Text: 4 Bogle, now represented by counsel, agreed with the report’s calculation of his amended guidelines range as 210 to 262 months’ imprisonment. Bogle asked the district court to “consider the applicability of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors in light of the advisory guidelines” and impose a sentence below that amended guidelines range. He again pointed to: (2) the remaining crack/powder sentencing disparity; and (2) his post-sentencing rehabilitation. With respect to the § 3553(a) factors, Bogle “admit[ed] that he needed to be punished for his offense, needed to be deterred from future unlawful conduct, and that the public to some extent needed to be protected from his unlawful conduct”; but that “given the facts and circumstances of this case, a further reduction in his sentence will be more than sufficient, but not greater than necessary to accomplish all of these goals.” The government agreed that Bogle was eligible for a § 3582(c)(2) reduction and that his amended guideline range was 210 to 262 months. The government noted that the district court must consider the § 3553(a) factors in deciding the extent of the reduction, but argued that the district court did not have the discretion to impose a sentence below the new range. The government stated that it did not oppose a reduction “to a total term of 296 months – 236 months on Counts One and Two, plus the 60 month consecutive term for Count Three.”