USA v. Eckles et al

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
STATESVILLE DIVISION
DOCKET NO.: 5:08CR9-V

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VS. ORDER

HARRY JAMES,
Defendant.

Nem” Seas? See “et” See!” See!” Se”

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s “Motion For Reconsideration.”
(Document #1326) -

Defendant, through counsel, claims that he is entitled to relief pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§3582(c)(2) and Amendment 706 beyond that granted by the Court on April 29, 2010.' However,
Defendant James fails to explain How he reaches this conclusion — particularly in light of the
statutory mandatory minimum sentence that appears to govern, (Document #1185 / 3/25/09 Suppl.
PSR) The Government did not move for a sentence beyond the statutory mandatory minimum
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3553(e), Likewise, there was no Rule 35 motion for reduction made on
James’ behalf. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion must be denied.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration is
DENIED.

Signed: January 19, 2011

Richard L. Voorhees
United States District Judge

' Consistent with the recommendation of the U.S. Probation Department, this Court found
Defendant James eligible for relief under Amendment 706 subject to any statutory provisions, namely,
the statutory mandatory minimum sentence of 120 months. Thus, James’ amended sentence was only
reduced by one month. (Document #1323)

INFORMATION

GPO

ee 5:05-cr-O0009-MEO-DCK Document 1367 Filed 01/19/11 Page1of1