472 F. App'x 415
7th Cir.2012Background
- Parker pleaded guilty in 1990 to possession of crack cocaine and heroin with intent to distribute; concurrent sentences of 142 months.
- In 1992, while imprisoned, Parker used prison telephones to coordinate powder cocaine sales; convicted of conspiracy in 1993 and sentenced to 420 months consecutive term.
- In 2008 Parker moved under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a reduction based on retroactive crack amendments (Amendments 706/715); argued his offense level would have been reduced if amendments had applied at initial sentencing.
- The district court denied the motion, ruling Parker had completed the 1990 crack sentence and was serving the consecutive powder-sentence, so the amendments did not affect his current range.
- The court applied policy statements prohibiting a reduced term below what Parker had already served; Parker’s consecutive sentences remained distinct, so the amendment could not yield relief; appeal was later dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Parker is eligible for a § 3582(c)(2) reduction despite completing the crack sentence. | Parker argues amendments would lower his base level if applied. | United States contends the completed crack sentence cannot be reduced and the aggregate-concept does not override that. | Not eligible; district court correct to deny. |
| Whether Parker’s appeal can be withdrawn under Anders in a § 3582(c)(2) proceeding. | N/A (Parker’s counsel sought to withdraw under Anders). | N/A. | Appeal dismissal affirmed; Anders safeguards not required in § 3582(c)(2) proceeding. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Forman, 553 F.3d 585 (7th Cir. 2009) (no right to appointed counsel in § 3582(c)(2) proceedings; Anders safeguards not required)
- United States v. Barresi, 361 F.3d 666 (2d Cir. 2004) (reaffirm policy that reduced terms cannot be less than already served)
- United States v. Stewart, 595 F.3d 197 (4th Cir. 2010) (consecutive sentences remain distinct terms; aggregation not dispositive)
- United States v. Gamble, 572 F.3d 472 (8th Cir. 2009) (consecutive sentences and completed term considerations under § 3582(c)(2))
- Tidwell, 178 F.3d 946 (7th Cir. 1999) (no right to counsel in § 3582(c)(2) proceedings)