Moore v. USA

Filing 32

ORDER denying 27 Motion for letter of recommendation (Pro se litigant served by US Mail). Signed by District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr on 5/21/2013. (blf)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:12cv152
[3:01cr31-2]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Vs.
RONALD ANTHONY MOORE,
Defendant.
_______________________________

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the court on defendant’s April 16, 2013, letter in which
he requests that the court issue a letter of recommendation concerning receiving a
reduction of sentence after successful completion of the RDAP program. According to
defendant, he is not eligible to receive the credit if he has a §922(g) conviction
(regardless of whether the conviction was vacated) or a §924(c) conviction that is less
than 15 years old. He contends that this court vacated his earlier §922(g) conviction and
that the BOP is willing to allow the credit if the court is willing to provide BOP with a
letter of recommendation.
In deciding whether to exercise such discretion, the court has taken into
consideration a number of factors. While a great deal of weight has been given to
petitioner’s voluntary participation in RDAP, the court has placed on the other side of the
scale the fact that despite having his §922(g) convicted vacated, petitioner was convicted
in 2003 of a serious §924(c) offense. In the commission of such offense, petitioner was a
-1-

participant (and there is evidence that he was the shooter) in a drive-by-shooting wherein
shots were fired at individuals both in and around an occupied home. Since the §924(c)
remains on the books, petitioner is per se ineligible for early release. Further, such life
threatening conduct followed on his release from his initial term of incarceration. As past
is usually prologue, petitioner’s violent criminal history as well as his propensity to
reoffend weigh against the discretionary relief sought. Thus, the court will not issue the
letter requested by petitioner.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that defendant’s letter, deemed to be a motion
for miscellaneous relief (#27), is DENIED.

The Clerk of Court shall send a copy of this Order to counsel of record as well as
USPO Chris Barber.

Signed: May 21, 2013

-2-