Court Opinion

ID: 9954030
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-25 16:00:49.711717+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:11:38.524524
License: Public Domain

Appellate Case: 23-1319     Document: 010111021134          Date Filed: 03/25/2024      Page: 1
                                                                                       FILED
                                                                           United States Court of Appeals
                        UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                             Tenth Circuit

                              FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT                               March 25, 2024
                          _________________________________
                                                                              Christopher M. Wolpert
                                                                                  Clerk of Court
  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

        Plaintiff - Appellee,

  v.                                                             No. 23-1319
                                                      (D.C. No. 1:05-CR-00141-RMR-1)
  LEE ARTHUR THOMPSON, a/k/a LT,                                  (D. Colo.)

        Defendant - Appellant.
                       _________________________________

                              ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
                          _________________________________

 Before MATHESON, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges. **
                   _________________________________

        This matter is before the court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Remand for Further

 Proceedings, in which they jointly request that the court “revers[e] the district court's

 order and remand[] the case for resentencing with instructions to calculate the revised

 Guidelines range before exercising its First Step Act discretion.” Upon consideration and

 review of the record, the court:

        *
          This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of
 law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its
 persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
        **
          Because this matter is being decided on a Joint Motion to Remand for Further
 Proceedings, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not
 materially assist in the determination of the appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2);
 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Appellate Case: 23-1319    Document: 010111021134          Date Filed: 03/25/2024      Page: 2

       A.     Grants the motion;

       B.     Reverses the district court’s order [ECF No. 1926] denying

              Mr. Thompson’s motion to reduce his sentence under the First Step Act and

              the district court’s order [ECF No. 2007] denying in part Mr. Thompson’s

              motion for reconsideration of ECF No. 1926;

       C.     Remands this case to the district court to conduct any further proceedings

              that may be appropriate in light of the precedent identified in the parties’

              joint motion for remand; and

       D.     Vacates the deadline for the government to file a response brief in this

              appeal.

       A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of the court.

                                              Entered for the Court

                                              CHRISTOPHER M. WOLPERT, Clerk

                                             2