USA v. Alfred Stokes, No. 17-60309 (5th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 17-60309 Document: 00514378695 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/08/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-60309 Summary Calendar FILED March 8, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee v. ALFRED GEORGE STOKES, Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 1:08-CR-26-1 Before BARKSDALE, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Alfred George Stokes, proceeding pro se, challenges the denial of his motion to modify his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) following an amendment to Sentencing Guideline § 2D1.1 (applicable to crimes involving controlled substances). The district court ruled he was ineligible for a sentence modification because he could have been sentenced as a career offender under Guideline § 4B1.1 (applicable to offenders who are: over 18 years old, Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 17-60309 Document: 00514378695 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/08/2018 No. 17-60309 committed a crime-of-violence or controlled-substance felony, and had committed at least two prior, crime-of-violence or controlled-substance felonies). Although Stokes concedes he qualified as a career offender at the time of sentencing, he contends he is eligible for a modification because the court instead determined his offense level under the above-referenced Guideline § 2D1.1. The court’s decision to reduce a sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is reviewed for abuse of discretion, e.g., United States v. Townsend, 55 F.3d 168, 170 (5th Cir. 1995); but defendant’s eligibility for a sentence reduction, the issue at hand, is reviewed de novo, United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 237 (5th Cir. 2009). Application Note 1(A) to Guideline § 1B1.10 (pertaining to reduction of term of imprisonment with amendment of the Guidelines) prohibits modifying a sentence if “the amendment does not have the effect of lowering the defendant’s applicable guideline range because of the operation of another guideline”. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, cmt. n.1(A); United States v. Carter, 595 F.3d 575, 581 (5th Cir. 2010) (holding Application Note 1(A) to Guideline § 1B1.10 is authoritative). In this instance, the operation of the career-offender Guideline prevented the court’s modifying Stokes’ sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, cmt. n.1(A); U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(b)(3). 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.
