Bogard

United States v. Bogard

Good Law
143 F. App'x 48
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 4, 2005No. 04-50018; D.C. No. CR-91-777-WDKCalifornia480 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Larry Donnell Bogard appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to recon *49 sider the denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) motion to reduce the 360-month sentence imposed following his conviction for distribution of PCP and possession with intent to distribute.

The filing of Bogard’s motion to reconsider did not toll the running of the appeal period from the district court’s denial of the § 3582 motion. See e.g., Scott v. Younger, 739 F.2d 1464, 1467 (9th Cir.1984). Bogard did, however, timely appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to reconsider. The scope of our review is, therefore, limited to the district court’s denial of Bogard’s motion for reconsideration. See Id.

We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion for reconsideration, see United States v. Hobbs, 31 F.3d 918, 923 (9th Cir.1994), and we affirm.

Bogard moved for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c), which allows the district court to reduce a defendant’s term of imprisonment if the sentence was based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered. Bogard’s motion was based on a 1995 amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines, Amendment…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.