United States v. Deshaun Lewis , 476 F. App'x 100 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 11-3831
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,                  * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the Southern
    v.                                * District of Iowa.
    *
    Deshaun Randell Lewis,                  *       [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: July 31, 2012
    Filed: August 3, 2012
    ___________
    Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    In 2008, Deshaun Lewis was sentenced to 204 months in prison after he pleaded
    guilty to a drug-conspiracy offense. See 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 841
    (a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846, 851.
    The district court1 reduced the then-applicable twenty-year mandatory minimum
    sentence based upon the government’s 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (e) motion. Lewis now
    appeals the court’s denial of his 
    18 U.S.C. § 3582
    (c)(2) sentence-reduction motion.
    After careful de novo review, we affirm. See United States v. Baylor, 
    556 F.3d 672
    ,
    673 (8th Cir. 2009).
    1
    The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United States District Judge for the Southern
    District of Iowa.
    Like the district court, we construe Lewis’s motion as seeking relief under
    Amendment 750 to the Guidelines, which lowered the base offense level for certain
    cocaine base offenses. However, Lewis’s Guidelines range reflected the statutory
    minimum sentence, which was not lowered by Amendment 750. Therefore, he was
    not eligible for relief under section 3582(c)(2), even though he was sentenced below
    the statutory minimum based upon the government’s substantial assistance motion.
    See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, comment. (n.1(A)(ii)); Baylor, 
    556 F.3d at 673
    ; United States
    v. Jones, 
    523 F.3d 881
    , 882 (8th Cir. 2008). Lewis further argues he is entitled to be
    resentenced under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. But that statute does not apply to
    persons sentenced before its enactment and in any event may not be properly raised
    in a § 3582(c)(2) motion.
    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant
    counsel’s motion to withdraw.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-3831

Citation Numbers: 476 F. App'x 100

Judges: Bowman, Colloton, Loken, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 8/3/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/5/2023