United States District Court, D. Connecticut
ORDER REDUCING SENTENCE PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §
MICHAEL P. SHEA, U.S.D.J.
December 17, 1999, Defendant Lloyd Streater (“Mr.
Streater”) was convicted of three counts of
drug-related offenses. Count 1 charged Mr. Streater with
conspiracy to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 846 and 841(a)(1). Counts 2 and 3 charged him
with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Mr. Streater was
sentenced by Judge Ellen Burns on May 25, 2000 to 480
months' imprisonment on Counts 1 and 2, and 240
months' imprisonment on Count 3, with all terms to run
concurrently. Judge Burns also imposed a term of supervised
release of 5 years on Count 1, 4 years on Count 2, and 3
years on Count 3, with all terms to run concurrently.
12, 2019, Mr. Streater filed a motion to reduce his sentence
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 782 to
the United States Sentencing Guideline. Section 3582(c)(2)
[I]n the case of a defendant who has been sentenced to a term
of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has
subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. [§] 994(o), upon motion of the
defendant or the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, or on its
own motion, the court may reduce the term of imprisonment,
after considering the factors set forth in section 3553(a) to
the extent that they are applicable, if such a reduction is
consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Under 28 U.S.C. § 994(o),
the United States Sentencing Commission (the
“Commission”) is charged with periodically
reviewing and revising the Guidelines. “When a revision
reduces the Guidelines range for a given offense, the
Commission must determine ‘in what circumstances and by
what amount the sentences of prisoners serving terms of
imprisonment for the offense may be reduced.'”
Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 820 (2010) (quoting 28
U.S.C. § 994(u)). The Commission's policy with
respect to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is set forth in
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 and is binding under the terms of the
statute. See Dillon, 560 U.S. at 827 (explaining that a
court's power under § 3582 is constrained by the
Commission's decision to amend the Guidelines and apply
the decision retroactively, as well as the Commission's
statements dictating “by what amount the sentence . . .
may be reduced.” (quotation marks omitted)).
forth in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, in applying 18 U.S.C. §
3582(c)(2), the Court must undertake a two-step inquiry. See
Dillon, 560 U.S. at 827. At step one, the Court determines
whether the defendant was sentenced under a provision of the
Guidelines that the Commission subsequently amended, and
whether that amendment was made retroactive. Id.;
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(d) (setting forth Guidelines
Amendments that apply retroactively). The Court then
calculates an amended guideline range by substituting only
the uideline provision made retroactive while leaving
“all other guideline application decisions
unaffected.” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(1). At step two,
the Court must “determine whether, in its discretion,
the reduction authorized by reference to the policies
relevant at step one is warranted in whole or in part under
the particular circumstances of the case.” Dillon, 560
U.S. at 527. In exercising this discretion, the Court
considers the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a),
the nature and seriousness of the danger posed to any person
or the community by the defendant, and the post-sentencing
conduct of the defendant. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10
Application Note 1.
Streater's case, Judge Burns applied the Sentencing
Guidelines Manual effective November 1, 1998. She found that
Mr. Streater was responsible for 120 kilograms of cocaine,
and his base offense level was therefore 36 under the
then-effective U.S.S.G. §§ 1B1.3 and 2D1.1(c).
Judge Burns added four additional levels under U.S.S.G.
3B1.1(a) because Mr. Streater had a leadership role in the
conspiracy. She added an additional two levels because she
concluded that Mr. Streater committed perjury at trial.
U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1. Mr. Streater's total offense level
was therefore 42. With a criminal history category I, his
guideline range was 360 months to life imprisonment.
parties agree that Mr. Streater is eligible for a sentencing
reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). In 2014, the
Commission amended Section 2D1.1(c) of the guidelines,
effectively reducing the base offense for all drug amounts by
two levels. See U.S.S.G. Supplement to Appendix C, Amendment
782. The Commission determined that the amendment should be
made retroactive. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(d). Under the
amended Section 2D1.1(c), Mr. Streater's base offense
assuming he was responsible for 120 kilograms of cocaine
would be 34. “All other guideline applications
decisions remain unaffected.” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10
Application Note 2. Thus, four levels are added because Mr.
Streater played a leadership role in the conspiracy, and two
levels are added because Mr. Streater committed perjury at
trial. The amended total offense level is 40. With a criminal
history category I, the amended guideline range is 292 to 365
determined that Mr. Streater is eligible for a sentencing
reduction, I hereby exercise my discretion to resentence him
to 306 months imprisonment. Like Judge Burns's original
sentence, this term of imprisonment falls within the
Guidelines range. I have reached this decision based on my
consideration of the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. §
3553(a), including by reviewing Mr. Streater's personal
history set forth in his original pre-sentence report and the
nature and circumstances of his offense. I have also reviewed
his progress report from the Bureau of Prisons dated July 15,
2019, as well as letters of support submitted on his behalf
from his friends and family.
imposing a sentence of 306 months, I expect that Mr. Streater
will receive credit for the time he has served since his
arrest on November 21, 1997, and that he will receive credit
toward the service of his sentence for satisfactory behavior.
See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3585 & 3624. In light of Mr.
Streater's progress report from the Bureau of Prisons, I
anticipate that he will be eligible for imminent release. In
particular, I have determined that the period of
incarceration that Mr. Streater has already served is
sufficient to comply with the purposes of sentencing. See 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2).
30 days of Mr. Streater's release, the United States
Probation Office is directed to petition the Court to hold a
hearing to discuss Mr. Streater's reentry and assess
whether any modification of the conditions of his ...