Court filing

Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) — United States v. Carlos Smith

Summary

An AO 247 Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) in United States of America v. Carlos Smith, Case No. 20 CR 922, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, dated and filed 06/14/2024 as Document 72, naming The Honorable Manish S. Shah. On the defendant's motion, the order is marked denied. The attached page records that the amendment lowered the criminal history category from III to II and the guideline range from 30 to 37 months to 27 to 33 months at total offense level 17. Judge Shah explains that the above-guidelines sentence of 48 months remains sufficient but not greater than necessary, citing the government program victim and a prior federal sentence of 60 months that did not deter the defendant, and that any resulting disparity is warranted.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) — United States v. Carlos Smith.” Original at ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov, No. 1:20-cr-00922, Doc. 72. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/us-v-carlos-smith/2024-06-14-order-sentence-reduction-dkt-72/, SHA-256 7a591d5359ed1f76391e715b560ad3ff8746d01b283a9c493cf5769040575c76.

Search CourtListener for this docket number

Full text

Case: 1:20-cr-00922 Document #: 72 Filed: 06/14/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:479
AO 247 (Rev. 11/11) Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) Page 1 of 2 (Page 2 Not for Public Disclosure)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
for the
Northern District
__________ District of
ofIllinois
__________

United States of America
v. )
Carlos Smith )
) Case No: 20 CR 922
) USM No: 47891-424
Date of Original Judgment: 02/24/2023 )
Date of Previous Amended Judgment: ) Erin K. DeGrand
(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Any) Defendant’s Attorney

ORDER REGARDING MOTION FOR SENTENCE REDUCTION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
Upon motion of ✔ ’ the defendant ’ the Director of the Bureau of Prisons ’ the court under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has
subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 994(u), and having considered such motion, and taking into account the policy statement set forth at USSG §1B1.10
and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), to the extent that they are applicable,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:
✔ DENIED. ’ GRANTED and the defendant’s previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in
’
the last judgment issued) of months is reduced to .
(Complete Parts I and II of Page 2 when motion is granted)

Except as otherwise provided, all provisions of the judgment dated shall remain in effect.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Order Date: 06/14/2024
Judge’s signature

Effective Date: The Honorable Manish S. Shah, U.S. District Judge
(if different from order date) Printed name and title
Case: 1:20-cr-00922 Document #: 72 Filed: 06/14/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:480
AO 247 (Rev. 11/11) Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) Page 2 of 2 (Page 2 Not for Public Disclosure)

This page contains information that should not be filed in court unless under seal.
(Not for Public Disclosure)

Carlos Smith
DEFENDANT:
CASE NUMBER: 20 CR 922
DISTRICT: Northern District of Illinois

I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE (Prior to Any Departures)
Previous Total Offense Level: 17 Amended Total Offense Level: 17
Criminal History Category: III Criminal History Category: II
Previous Guideline Range: 30 to 37 months Amended Guideline Range: 27 to 33 months

II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO THE AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE
’ The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range.
’ The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the
time of sentencing as a result of a substantial assistance departure or Rule 35 reduction, and the reduced sentence
is comparably less than the amended guideline range.
’ The reduced sentence is above the amended guideline range.

III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Although the amended guideline range is lower than the original range, the above-guidelines sentence of 48 months
remains the sufficient but not greater than necessary sentence after consideration of the Section 3553(a) factors.
Neither the original nor amended range adequately accounts for the seriousness of the offense (e.g., the government
program victim) or defendant's history and characteristics (a prior, slightly below guidelines, federal sentence of 60
months that did not deter defendant). Although a properly calculated guidelines range is a starting point, and
variances need to be justified, the guidelines range is not a mathematical anchor. The original sentence was not
arrived at by measuring its distance from the guidelines range. It was a holistic determination, and the sentence is not
harsher today because the guidelines are lower. The sentence remains what it was: 48 months as a sufficient, but not
greater than necessary, measure of just punishment. Defendant's post-sentencing conduct is commendable but does
not persuade the court that a sentence below 48 months would be sufficient. Finally, that the sentence is at a greater
variance from the amended guidelines range than the original range does not create an unwarranted disparity.
Guideline sentences avoid disparities, but there are times when the seriousness of the offense is a weightier
consideration when fashioning just punishment and rote adherence to avoiding disparity through guideline sentencing
would deprecate the seriousness of the offense. This is such a case. Any disparity from other defendants with similar
records who commit similar crimes is entirely warranted here.

Print Save As... Add Attachment Reset

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.ilnd.394355.72.0.pdf
Size: 381,814 bytes
SHA-256: 7a591d5359ed1f76391e715b560ad3ff8746d01b283a9c493cf5769040575c76
Our copy: gov.uscourts.ilnd.394355.72.0.pdf
Original: PACER (login required)