United States v. Worth , 344 F. App'x 14 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •            IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    September 2, 2009
    No. 09-40149                      Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Summary Calendar                            Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    KELVIN BERNARD WORTH
    Defendant - Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Texas
    USDC No. 2:05-CR-3-3
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Kelvin Worth was sentenced to 200 months in prison following his plea of
    guilty to possession with intent to distribute and distribution of crack cocaine
    in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841.          Following amendments to the Sentencing
    Guidelines that lowered the base offense levels for crack cocaine offenses, the
    district court granted Worth’s motion for sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. §
    3582(c)(2) and reduced Worth’s sentence to 151 months, the minimum sentence
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .
    R. 47.5.4.
    No. 09-40149
    under the amended Guidelines. Worth appeals and challenges the limits on the
    district court’s discretion set forth in U.S.S.G § 1B1.10 and argues the district
    court had the authority to impose an sentence below the minimum in light of the
    Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Booker.1 The Government has moved
    for summary affirmance, asserting that the district court could not reduce
    Worth’s sentence further. Alternatively, the Government moves for an extension
    of time to file a brief.
    Worth’s arguments fail in light of our recent decision in United States v.
    Doublin.2 Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is
    GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.                 The
    Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is
    DENIED as moot.
    1
    
    543 U.S. 220
    (2005).
    2
    
    572 F.3d 235
    (5th Cir. 2009).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-40149

Citation Numbers: 344 F. App'x 14

Judges: Clement, Higginbotham, Per Curiam, Southwick

Filed Date: 9/2/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023