US v. Kerry Lee, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:08-cr-00024-JPJ-7. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency . Mailed to: Kerry Donnell Lee, Jr. [16-7311]
Pg: 1 of 4
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
KERRY DONNELL LEE, JR., a/k/a Skinny,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Abingdon.
James P. Jones, District
February 27, 2017
March 7, 2017
Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kerry Donnell Lee, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Bockhorst, Zachary T. Lee, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Mary Kathleen Carnell, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 4
Kerry Donnell Lee, Jr., appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a reduction
of his sentence.
Lee sought relief under Amendment 750 and
Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“USSG”), both of which lowered the
base offense levels for drug offenses involving cocaine base.
See USSG § 2D1.1(c) (2015); USSG app. C, amends. 750, 782.
benefit of the Amendments because he was sentenced as a career
Our review of the record reveals that, although Lee
qualified as a career offender, see USSG § 4B1.1 (2007), he was
reasons that follow, we conclude that the Amendments would not
have the effect of lowering Lee’s Guidelines sentencing range.
We accordingly affirm.
See United States v. Smith, 395 F.3d
516, 519 (4th Cir. 2005) (holding that we “may affirm on any
grounds apparent from the record”).
sentence of a defendant who “has been sentenced to a term of
imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently
been lowered by the Sentencing Commission.”
United States v.
Williams, 808 F.3d 253, 257 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation
To determine whether a particular amendment has
Pg: 3 of 4
sentencing range, “the sentencing court must substitute only the
amendments rendered retroactive by the Commission and leave all
(internal quotation marks omitted).
“Guidelines Amendments 750
and 782 lowered the base offense levels assigned to different
amounts of cocaine base,” and both amendments are retroactive.
United States v. Peters, 843 F.3d 572, 575 (4th Cir. 2016).
“Amendment 750 increased the minimum quantity of cocaine base
necessary to trigger the maximum base offense level [of 38] from
4.5 to 8.4 kilograms.”
“Amendment 782 again raised the
requisite amount of cocaine base from 8.4 to 25.2 kilograms.”
maximum base offense level (38 levels) still applies.”
Lee was held responsible for 51.35 kilograms of cocaine
effect on his base offense level.
Simply stated, Lee’s sentence
was not “based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been
Had Lee been sentenced after the Amendments went
into effect, his base offense level would remain 38, the career
Pg: 4 of 4
Amendment 750 nor Amendment 782 has the effect of lowering Lee’s
Because Lee is ineligible for a sentence reduction under
§ 3582(c)(2), we affirm the district court’s denial of relief on
this alternate ground.
We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?