USA v. Levence Simpson

Filing 2

Opinion

Download PDF
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted October 17, 2008 Decided October 24, 2008 Before FRANK H. EASTERBROOK , Chief Judge JOEL M. FLAUM , Circuit Judge KENNETH F. RIPPLE , Circuit Judge No. 08-2042 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LE VENCE SIMPSON, Defendant-Appellant. Order Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois No. 1:01-cr-10038-JBM-JAG-4 Joe Billy McDade, Judge. After the Sentencing Commission reduced the guideline ranges for crack cocaine, and made the change retroactive, see Amendments 706 and 711, LeVence Simpson asked the district court to reduce his sentence. A judge is authorized to implement a retroactive change in the guidelines. See 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The district court denied Simpson's motion, observing that his sentence of 240 This successive appeal has been submitted to the original panel under Operating Procedure 6(b). After examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); Cir. R. 34(f). No. 08-2042 Page 2 months is the statutory minimum for his offense and criminal record. A change in guidelines does not entitle a court to disregard a statutory minimum sentence. Neal v. United States, 516 U.S. 284 (1996). Simpson's appellate brief ignores this problem and relies entirely on decisions such as Kimbrough v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 558 (2007), that concern the Guidelines rather than statutes. No more need be said to show that the district court's order is correct. AFFIRMED

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?