Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 19 views

    United States v. Billy Cleveland, 11th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Billy Cleveland's motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Cleveland's sentence was based on the career offender guideline rather than the drug quantity tables, so he was ineligible for reduction under Amendment 782. While Cleveland challenged his classification as a career offender, the court held this was outside the limited scope of a § 3582(c)(2) motion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    United States v. Billy Cleveland, 11th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    19 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Billy Cleveland's motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Cleveland's sentence was based on the career offender guideline rather than the drug quantity tables, so he was ineligible for reduction under Amendment 782. While Cleveland challenged his classification as a career offender, the court held this was outside the limited scope of a § 3582(c)(2) motion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-06-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-15296

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Billy Cleveland's motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Cleveland's sentence was based on the career offender guideline rather than the drug quantity tables, so he was ineligible for reduction under Amendment 782. While Cleveland challenged his classification as a career offender, the court held this was outside the limited scope of a § 3582(c)(2) motion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    19 views2 pages

    United States v. Billy Cleveland, 11th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Billy Cleveland's motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Cleveland's sentence was based on the career offender guideline rather than the drug quantity tables, so he was ineligible for reduction under Amendment 782. While Cleveland challenged his classification as a career offender, the court held this was outside the limited scope of a § 3582(c)(2) motion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    Case: 14-15296

    Date Filed: 06/15/2015

    Page: 1 of 2

    [DO NOT PUBLISH]

    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
    ________________________
    No. 14-15296
    Non-Argument Calendar
    ________________________
    D.C. Docket No. 0:01-cr-06242-WPD-1

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    versus
    BILLY CLEVELAND,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    ________________________
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Florida
    ________________________
    (June 15, 2015)
    Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JORDAN and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Case: 14-15296

    Date Filed: 06/15/2015

    Page: 2 of 2

    Billy Cleveland appeals pro se the denial of his motion for a sentence
    reduction. 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). Cleveland based his motion on Amendment 782
    to the Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm.
    The district court did not err when it denied Clevelands motion for a
    reduction of his sentence. Cleveland, whose sentence is based on the career
    offender guideline, U.S.S.G. 4B1.1, not on the drug quantity tables, id. 2D1.1,
    is ineligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782. See United States v.
    Lawson, 686 F.3d 1317, 1321 (11th Cir. 2012); United States v. Moore, 541 F.3d
    1323, 132730 (11th Cir. 2008). Cleveland challenges his classification as a career
    offender, but that challenge is outside the limited scope of section 3582(c)(2). See
    United States v. Bravo, 203 F.3d 778, 78081 (11th Cir. 2000).
    We AFFIRM the denial of Clevelands motion to reduce.

    You might also like