USA v. Contee, No. 08-50585 (5th Cir. 2009)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 08-50585 Summary Calendar July 15, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. WILLIAM COURTNEY CONTEE, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:06-CR-151-1 Before DAVIS, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* William Courtney Contee, federal prisoner # 34683-177, pleaded guilty in 2006 to conspiracy to distribute and to possess with the intent to distribute 50 grams or more of crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and he was sentenced to 250 months. He now appeals the reduced 240-month sentence he received following the district court s sua sponte 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion * Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4. No. 08-50585 based on the retroactive amendments to the crack cocaine guidelines. The sentence imposed represents the relevant statutory mandatory minimum. For the first time on appeal, Contee argues that the mandatory minimum strips district courts of the power to consider the sentencing factors of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and is therefore unconstitutional under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). His claim is without merit. A district court cannot impose a sentence lower than the statutory minimum following the grant of a § 3582(c)(2) motion. See Kimbrough v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 558, 574 (2007); United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 559 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 624 (2008). Contee makes no argument that he meets the limited circumstances for a sentence below the statutory minimum. See United States v. Harper, 527 F.3d 396, 411 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 212 (2008). Accordingly, the district court s order imposing the statutory minimum sentence is AFFIRMED. 2

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.