United States v. Hameed
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAlice M. Batchelder, Chief Judge
I agree that Talif Hameed is not eligible for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). I disagree, however, with the majority’s conclusion that Ha-meed’s sentence was “based on” U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1. I also disagree with the majority’s dicta regarding whether or not the statutory minimum is the only “applicable guideline range” for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B). I therefore concur in part and dissent in part.
The majority’s analysis of the “based on” prong of the test for eligibility for reduction of sentence does not take proper account of the key differences between a…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- United States v. MooreCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2008
- United States v. StewartCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- Melendez v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- United States v. Herrera-ZunigaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. HoodCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2009
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.