United States of America v. Donte Moore

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted May 4, 2023*
Decided May 5, 2023
Before
ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge
JOHN Z. LEE, Circuit Judge
DORIS L. PRYOR, Circuit Judge
No. 22‐1995
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff‐Appellee,
v.
DONTE MOORE,
Defendant‐Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Western District of
Wisconsin.
No. 19‐cr‐160‐jdp
James D. Peterson,
Chief Judge.
O R D E R
Donte Moore, a federal prisoner, challenges the denial of his motion to credit
time spent in state custody to his federal sentence. Because the court had no basis to
modify his sentence, we affirm.
* The appellee is not participating in this appeal. After examining the appellant’s
brief and the record, we have concluded that the case is appropriate for summary
disposition. See FED. R. A PP. P. 34(a)(2).
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with FED. R. A PP. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 22‐1995 Page 2
In 2020, Moore was convicted of possessing cocaine, see 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and
sentenced to 11 years in prison. At the time of sentencing, Moore had spent a year in
state custody on state charges. The district court structured Moore’s federal sentence to
begin on the date of federal sentencing and run concurrently with the remainder of his
state sentence.
About a year and a half later, Moore moved the district court to reduce his
federal sentence by one year to account for the time that he had spent in state custody
before federal sentencing. Moore provided no basis for the court to modify his sentence;
he cited a statute and guidelines provision that inform the court’s decision between
imposing concurrent or consecutive prison terms at sentencing. See 18 U.S.C. § 3584;
U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3. The court denied the motion, explaining that it had authority to
modify his sentence “only in limited circumstances,” and none applied to Moore’s case.
On appeal, Moore argues that the court had power to “reassess” his sentence and
give him credit for the time he spent in state custody. But “[o]nce a district judge has
sentenced a defendant, the judge may ‘modify a term of imprisonment’ only to the
extent allowed by retroactive legislation, retroactive changes in the Sentencing
Guidelines, a motion for compassionate release, or motion under Criminal Rule 35 or
36.” United States v. Hible, 13 F.4th 647, 649–50 (7th Cir. 2021) (quoting 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(B)). None of these bases for modification exists here.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --