United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division
C. DEVER III Chief United States District Judge.
March 10, 2014, Asael Gomez-Jimenez
("Gomez-Jimenez") pleaded guilty to possession with
intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine and aiding and
abetting (count eight), and elude examination and inspection
by immigration officers (count ten). See [D.E. 182]. On March
13, 2014, a jury found Gomez-Jimenez guilty of conspiracy to
distribute and possess with intent to distribute 5 kilograms
of cocaine (count one), and possession with intent to
distribute 28 grams or more of cocaine base (crack) (count
five). See [D.E. 196].
8, 2014, the court held Gomez-Jimenez's sentencing
hearing. See [D.E. 257]. At the hearing, the court adopted
the facts set forth in the Presentence Investigation Report
("PSR") except as to matters in dispute. See
Sentencing Tr. [D.E. 257] 5-6. The court ruled on
Gomez-Jimenez's objections to the PSR and calculated
Gomez-Jimenez's total offense level to be 39, his
criminal history category to be I, and his advisory guideline
range to be 262 to 324 months' imprisonment on count one.
See Id. at 5-12. The advisory guideline range on
count five and count eight was 240 months' imprisonment.
See Id. at 11. The advisory guideline range on count
ten was six months. See Id. After thoroughly
considering all relevant factors under 18 U.S.C. §
3553(a), the court sentenced Gomez-Jimenez to 324 months'
imprisonment on count one, 240 months' imprisonment on
counts five and eight, and 6 months' imprisonment on
count ten, to run concurrently for a total term of 324
months' imprisonment. See Id. at 20-27; [D.E.
appealed. On September 29, 2015, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed his conviction and
sentence. See United States v. Gomez-Jimenez. 625
F.App'x 602, 604-06 (4th Cir. 2015) (per curiam)
October 30, 2015, Gomez-Jimenez filed a pro se motion for a
sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2),
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, and Amendment 782 to the Sentencing
Guidelines. See [D.E. 317]. On March 9, 2016, Gomez-Jimenez
(through counsel) filed another motion for a sentence
reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), U.S.S.G. §
1B1.10, and Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. See
[D.E. 327]. Gomez-Jimenez's new advisory guideline range
on count one is 210 to 262 months' imprisonment, based on
a total offense level of 37 and a criminal history category
of I. See id Gomez-Jimenez requests a 260-month sentence on
count one. See id. at 2. On March 22, 2016, the
government responded to Gomez-Jimenez's motions. See
court has discretion to reduce Gomez-Jimenez's sentence.
See, e.g.. Dillon v. United States. 560 U.S. 817,
827 (2010); United States v. Peters. 843 F.3d 572,
574 (4th Cir. 2016); United States v. Patterson. No.
16-6867, 2016 WL 6958628, at *1 (4th Cir. Nov. 29, 2016) (per
curiam) (unpublished); United States v. Cole. 618
F.App'x 178, 178-79 (4th Cir. 2015) (per curiam)
(unpublished); United States v. Thomas. 546
F.App'x 225, 225-26 (4th Cir. 2013) (per curiam)
(unpublished); United States v. Perez. 536
F.App'x 321, 321 (4th Cir. 2013) (per curiam)
(unpublished); United States v. Smalls. 720 F.3d
193, 195-97 (4th Cir. 2013); United States v. Mann.
709 F.3d 301, 306-07 (4th Cir. 2013); United States v.
Stewart. 595 F.3d 197, 200 (4th Cir. 2010). In deciding
whether to reduce Gomez-Jimenez's sentence, the court
finds that Gomez-Jimenez participated in a major cocaine
conspiracy for a long period of time. See PSR [D.E. 210]
¶¶ 1-34; Sentencing Tr. at 18-22. He did so even
though his relatives received lengthy prison sentences for
participating in an earlier cocaine conspiracy in this
district, and he came from Mexico to replace them. See
Sentencing Tr. at 18-22; PSR¶¶ 8-10. Moreover,
Gomez-Jimenez possessed a firearm during the commission of
the offense. See PSR ¶ 33. Finally, Gomez-Jimenez has
sustained no disciplinary actions while incarcerated on his
most recent federal conviction. See [D.E. 327]; cf Pepper
v. United States. 562 U.S. 476, 491 (2011).
reviewed the entire record and all relevant policy
statements, the court finds that Gomez-Jimenez received the
sentence that was "sufficient, but not greater than
necessary" under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Further
reducing Gomez-Jimenez's sentence would threaten public
safety in light of his serious criminal conduct. Cf. U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.10, cmt. n.l(B)(ii). Thus, the court denies
Gomez-Jimenez's motion for reduction of sentence.
See, e.g., Patterson. 2016 WL 6958628, at *l-2;
Cole. 618 F.App'x at 178-79; Thomas.
546 F.App'x at 225-26; Perez. 536 F.App'x at
the court DENIES Gomez-Jimenez's motions for reduction of