United States v. Douglas Meek


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: ROGER L. WOLLMAN, MICHAEL J. MELLOY and LAVENSKI R. SMITH. Appellant's motion to hold this appeal in abeyance has been considered by the court and is hereby denied [3876482-2]. (UNPUBLISHED) [3906495] [11-3885]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-3885 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Douglas Marcel Meeks, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: April 23, 2012 Filed: May 1, 2012 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Douglas Meeks appeals the district court’s1 order denying his request for a post-judgment sentence reduction. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Meeks’s request, see United States v. Whiting, 522 F.3d 845, 852-53 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review), because Meeks was sentenced before the enactment of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 and he received a statutory mandatory minimum sentence, see United States v. Sidney, 648 F.3d 904, 908 (8th Cir. 2011) (statutory mandatory minimums have always trumped 1 The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. Appellate Case: 11-3885 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/01/2012 Entry ID: 3906495 Guidelines, even where amended Guidelines would have otherwise called for shorter sentence); United States v. Orr, 636 F.3d 944, 957-58 (8th Cir. 2011) (Fair Sentencing Act did not apply retroactively to defendant who was sentenced before enactment of FSA to mandatory minimum sentence of life under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)). Accordingly, we affirm. In addition, we deny Meeks’s motion to hold this appeal in abeyance. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 11-3885 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/01/2012 Entry ID: 3906495

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?