Order — United States v. Williams (Dkt. 62, M.D. Ala.)

Summary

An order of U.S. District Judge R. Austin Huffaker, Jr. in United States v. Pamela Denise Williams, Case No. 3:23-CR-98-RAH, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, dated and filed October 2, 2024 as Document 62. It recounts that Williams was sentenced on January 18, 2024 to 33 months of imprisonment and 5 years of supervised release for bank fraud, and that she has filed three pro se motions for sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 821 (Docs. 52, 56, 61). The court had denied the first on June 5, 2024, finding that she received no status points and was not a zero-point offender. It denies the latest motion (Doc. 61).

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

Record facts

Full text

Case 3:23-cr-00098-RAH-JTA Document 62 Filed 10/02/24 Page 1 of 3




                  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                  FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
                            EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                )
                                        )
      v.                                )      CASE NO. 3:23-CR-98-RAH
                                        )
PAMELA DENISE WILLIAMS                  )


                                    ORDER

      On January 18, 2024, this Court sentenced Defendant Pamela Denise

Williams to 33 months of imprisonment followed by 5 years of supervised release

on her conviction for bank fraud. (Doc. 47.) Since her sentencing, the Defendant

has filed three Motions for Sentence Reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

and Amendment 821 to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. (Docs. 52, 56, 61.) She

filed the motions pro se.

      On June 5, 2024, this Court denied the Defendant’s first motion, specifically

finding:

      The defendant received no Chapter Four status points at her original
      sentencing and was not determined to be a zero-point offender.
      Pursuant to USSG §1B1.10(a)(2)(A), a reduction in the defendant’s
      term of imprisonment is not consistent with this policy statement and
      therefore is not authorized under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) because none
      of the amendments listed in subsection (d) is applicable to the
      defendant.

(Doc. 54 at 1.)

      Case 3:23-cr-00098-RAH-JTA Document 62 Filed 10/02/24 Page 2 of 3




      On August 5, 2024, this Court denied the Defendant’s second motion,

specifically finding:

      On June 5, 2024, the Court denied the defendant's motion for a sentence
      reduction pursuant to Amendment 821. The defendant did not receive
      status points and is not a zero-point offender and therefore is ineligible
      for relief under Parts A and B of Amendment 821. The issues presented
      in the defendant's second pro se motion (doc. 56) were considered by
      the Court when it concluded that the defendant was ineligible for a
      sentence reduction. To the extent that the defendant's second pro se
      motion seeks reconsideration of the Court's June 5, 2024 Order, the
      motion presents no new grounds for relief and is denied.

(Doc. 59 at 1.)

      Pending before the Court is the Defendant’s third motion, in which she seeks

an adjustment for zero-point offenders based on §4C1.1 of the Sentencing

Guidelines. (Doc. 61.) As explained in this Court’s prior orders (Docs. 54, 59),

Amendment 821 is inapplicable because the Defendant did not receive status points

and is not a zero-point offender.

      Accordingly, it is

      ORDERED that the third Motion for Reduction of Sentence pursuant to 18

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 821 to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines

(Doc. 61) is DENIED.

      DONE, on this the 2nd day of October 2024.



                                    R. AUSTIN HUFFAKER, JR.
                                    UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

                                          2

Case 3:23-cr-00098-RAH-JTA Document 62 Filed 10/02/24 Page 3 of 3




                                3

File and source

File

62.pdf

Size

98,082 bytes

SHA-256

4c672e898b4e445398f8b9cbb1d1e40551d4147c790b337af0615020e2d209f6

Our copy

62.pdf