United States v. Tony Muhammad, No. 08-3073 (8th Cir. 2009)

 Annotate this Case

Court Description: Criminal case - sentencing. Because defendant was sentenced under a binding plea agreement, the district court lacked authority to reduce his sentence under the amendments to the crack sentencing guidelines.

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 08-3073 ___________ United States of America, * * * * * * * * * Appellee, v. Tony Muhammad, Appellant. ___________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. No. 08-3075 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Tony Muhammad, also known as Tony Curtis, also known as Baby Tony , Appellant. * * * * * * * * * * * * * [UNPUBLISHED] ___________ Submitted: November 19, 2009 Filed: November 24, 2009 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Tony Muhammad appeals the district court s1 denial of relief under 18 U.S.C. ยง 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 706 of the Sentencing Guidelines. Muhammad was indicted in two separate cases for conspiring to distribute cocaine base, but he entered a plea agreement covering both indictments and was sentenced to concurrent 228-month prison terms. The district court appointed counsel to represent Muhammad in bringing a section 3582(c)(2) motion, and denied a reduction. Muhammad s filings were docketed in both criminal cases, and were denied by the district court in both cases. His notices of appeal are docketed as two consolidated appeals. Because Muhammad was sentenced based on a binding plea agreement, the district court lacked authority to reduce his sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Scurlark, 560 F.3d 839, 841-43 (8th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, the judgments are affirmed. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. -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.