United States v. Sterling McKoy, No. 12-2857 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. For the court's earlier opinion on McKoy's motion to modify his sentence, see United States v. McKoy, 665 F.3d 968 (8th Cir. 2011). On remand, the district court did not err in determining McKoy was not eligible for a sentence reduction. [ August 27, 2012
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 12-2857 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Sterling McKoy, also known as Jerome, also known as Mr. Mafioso lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha ____________ Submitted: August 9, 2012 Filed: August 28, 2012 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Sterling McKoy was convicted of conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine in 2004 and was sentenced to 300 months imprisonment, a downward variance from his guideline range of 360 months to life. In 2011 he moved for a modification of his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on amendment 706 to the sentencing guidelines, which lowered the base offense levels for offenses involving cocaine base. The district court concluded that the amendment did not apply retroactively and denied the motion. McKoy appealed. We reversed and remanded, noting that the amendment was retroactive. United States v. McKoy, 665 F.3d 968, 970 (8th Cir. 2011). On remand, the district court denied McKoy's motion, concluding that he was not eligible for a reduction in sentence. We affirm. The Sentencing Commission's recent changes to the policy statement applicable to § 3582(c)(2) motions foreclose the relief McKoy seeks. See U.S.S.G. app. C (vol. III) amend. 759 (2011); McKoy, 665 F.3d at 970 (noting changes). That policy statement permits sentence reductions "to a term that is less than the minimum of the amended guideline range" only if the defendant provided substantial assistance to the government. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2) (2011). District courts are to "use the version of this policy statement that is in effect on the date on which the court reduces the defendant's term of imprisonment as provided by 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)." U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.6 (2011). The minimum of the amended guideline range applicable to McKoy's offense under amendment 706 would be greater than his current sentence of 300 months. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A). Since McKoy did not provide substantial assistance and any reduction would be "to a term that is less than the minimum of the amended guideline range," he is not eligible for a reduction under the current version of the policy statement. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court 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.
