Eleventh Circuit· 2/23/2010

United States v. Phillips

Citations

597 F.3d 1190
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 3810
2010 WL 610883

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider a motion for reconsideration after it reduced Phillips’s sentence under § 3582(c)(2)
noting that a district court’s authority to modify a prison sentence is “narrowly limited” under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)
noting that a dis- trict court has “no inherent authority” to modify a criminal sen- tence (quotation marks omitted)
stating that “absent other express statutory authority, modification of an imprisonment sentence can only be done pursuant to Rule 35”
analyzing whether the district court had authority to modify a sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(B)
providing a district court may correct a sentence within the time provided by Rule 35(a), but lacks jurisdiction to modify a sentence outside of that timeframe

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carnes, Hull, Anderson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.