Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Dixon

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Paducah

June 17, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
v.
DONTE LEMONTE DIXON, DEFENDANT

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          THOMAS B. RUSSELL, SENIOR JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on Defendant Donte Dixon's Motion to Run Sentences Concurrent. [R. 56.] The Government responded. [R.62.] Also, before the Court is Dixon's Motion to Appoint Counsel. [R. 61.] These matters are ripe for adjudication. For the reasons stated herein, Dixon's Motion to Run Sentences Concurrent, [R. 56], is DENIED and Dixon's Motion to Appoint Counsel, [R. 61], is DENIED.

         On August 15, 2008, Dixon was sentenced to 151 months of imprisonment by this Court. [R. 25 at 3 (Judgment).] As noted in the Government's Response, at the end of the sentencing procedure, the following colloquy took place:

DEFENSE COUNSEL: Judge, there is one issue, and I think the U.S. Attorney has no objection. [Dixon] currently has a state sentence which is in the process of revocation. It had not been revoked officially as of yesterday. I understand if it had been officially revoked, there could be some wording that it would run concurrent with this time, consistent with the recommendation. I just don't know what the court can do as far as putting anything in there.
THE COURT: I don't think there's anything for me to run it concurrent with.
DEFENSE COUNSEL: He has signed the papers and things already. It just hasn't-I don't know what the holdup is but . . .
THE COURT: I just don't-I have no-there's no state revocation at this time, I understand, for me to run it concurrent with. Does the United-if it were there, would the government have any objection to it?
THE UNITED STATES: No, Your Honor, we wouldn't. But the court is correct, the sentence would have to be in place as of today in order for the judge to run it concurrent. So it would be up to the state parole or whoever revokes it.
THE COURT: Maybe they'll run theirs concurrent with-
DEFENSE COUNSEL: I understand they are, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. It'll all come out the same either way. Under the terms of his plea agreement, he waived his right to appeal and collaterally attack this sentence?
DEFENSE COUNSEL: Yes, Judge.

[R. 58 at 7-8 (Transcript of Sentencing Hearing)). On October 31, 2016, Dixon was released from federal prison. [R. 56; R. 62 at 3.] According to the Government, the state never ordered Dixon's revocation time to run concurrently with his federal sentence, and, in 2018, Dixon was returned to state custody to finish serving his state sentences-totaling thirteen years imprisonment. [R. 62 at 3.]

         In March of 2012, Dixon filed a Motion to Execute Warrant and Run State Time Concurrent with Federal Sentence. [R. 28.] In that motion, Dixon requested that the Court run his federal sentence concurrent with his state sentences. [Id. at 2.] The Court denied this motion, finding it was without jurisdiction. [R. 42.] Now, six years ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.