Denial of Reduction in Sentence Affirmed

US v. Mock, No. 09-4154, involved defendant's appeal from the district court's denial of defendant's motion for a reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2).  The court of appeals affirmed on the grounds that 1) neither the district court nor the court of appeals was free to address, in a proceeding pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2), defendant's arguments regarding procedural errors at his original, now-final sentencing; and 2) at least for purposes of a motion for a reduced sentence, the record disclosed that defendant was sentenced as a career offender under U.S.S.G. section 4B1.1.

As the court wrote:  "Defendant-Appellant John Mock III appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for a reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), which he filed based on the amendments to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines relating to the base offense levels for crack-related offenses, see U.S.S.G., Supp. to App. C., Amend. 706 (effective Nov. 1, 2007); see also id. Amend. 713 (effective Mar. 3, 2008) (collectively, the "crack cocaine amendments"). The district court reasoned that, because Mock was originally sentenced as a career offender, see U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, he was ineligible for a sentence reduction based on the crack cocaine amendments."

Related Resources

• Full Text of US v. Mock, No. 09-4154