United States v. Sykes, No. 10-50399 (9th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed from the district court's denial in part of his motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). Defendant contended that the district court's modification of his sentence to the 120-month mandatory minimum term pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)(A) constituted the application of a new sentence in violation of Dillon v. United States and that the sentence the court ordered violated Apprendi v. New Jersey. The court affirmed and held that the district court's application of the mandatory minimum term pursuant to section 841(b)(1)(A) did not constitute an imposition of a new sentence.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.