United States Seventh Circuit

District court's grant of a 3-month reduction in sentence instead of defendant's request for a 15-month reduction is affirmed where: 1) district court did not abuse its discretion by appointing counsel after deciding that defendant would receive a 3-month reduction as there is no right to counsel in a 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2) proceeding and defendant did not even ask that counsel be appointed when he filed his pro se motion; and 2) district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's request for 15 month reduction as the court is not required to reduce defendant's sentence to 75% of his new Guidelines range because section 3582(c)(2)leaves the extent of the reduction within the court's discretion.

Appellate Information

• Argued 03/03/2009
• Decided 09/02/2009
• Published 09/02/2009

Judges

• PER CURIAM., Before BAUER, KANNE and WOOD, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Joseph C. Pedersen (argued), Edmond E-Min Chang, Asst. U.S. Atty., Office of The United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Paul E. Gaziano (argued), Federal Defender Program, Rockford, IL, Terence F. MacCarthy, Office of The Federal Defender Program, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.