USA v. Michael Hawley


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-41038 Affirmed ] Judge: PEH , Judge: ECP , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 07/12/2017 [16-41038]

Download PDF
Case: 16-41038 Document: 00514043151 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-41038 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 21, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MICHAEL JAY HAWLEY, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:08-CR-49-1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Michael Jay Hawley, federal prisoner # 15687-078, was convicted of conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and possession of a firearm during and in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. He appeals the denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a reduction of sentence. Hawley argues that he is entitled to a reduction under Sentencing Guidelines Amendment 782 and contends that the district court should have applied the offense level 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 16-41038 Document: 00514043151 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2017 No. 16-41038 agreed upon in the plea agreement. He also asserts that the district court offered insufficient reasons for denying the motion. Hawley is ineligible for a sentence reduction because he was sentenced below the amended guidelines range of imprisonment. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A), p.s.; United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 238 (5th Cir. 2009). The district court was not required to provide reasons for its denial of the § 3582(c)(2) motion. See United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d 667, 674 (5th Cir. 2009). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2

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?