United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, El Dorado Division
JAMIE B. MARTIN PETITIONER
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RESPONDENT
O. Hickey United States District Judge
the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed March 12,
2018, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States
Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (ECF
No. 289). Judge Bryant recommends that the Court deny
Petitioner Jamie B. Martin's Motion to Correct Sentence
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36. (ECF No.
264). Petitioner has filed objections. (ECF No. 295). The
Court finds the matter ripe for consideration.
March 6, 2013, Petitioner was named in four counts of a
fifteen-count Indictment filed in the Western District of
Arkansas. Counts One and Two charged Petitioner with
conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, and Counts Three
and Four charged him with aiding and abetting in the
distribution of methamphetamine. On December 11, 2013,
Petitioner appeared before the Court with counsel Bill McLean
and William Luppen, and pleaded guilty to Count One, pursuant
to a written plea agreement. On April 9, 2015, the Court
sentenced Petitioner to 240 months' imprisonment and
three years' supervised release, imposed a $100 special
assessment, and dismissed the remaining counts against him.
(ECF No. 209).
February 10, 2017, Petitioner filed a Motion to Correct
Sentence Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.
(ECF No. 264). In the motion, Petitioner asserts that his
sentence was improperly calculated. He states that the Court
indicated in his sentencing hearing that it intended for him
to receive a two-point reduction of his base offense level in
light of Amendments 782 and 788 to the United States
Sentencing Guidelines. Petitioner asserts further that he did
not receive the reduction. Accordingly, Petitioner asks the
Court to recalculate his sentence pursuant to Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 36, which in part allows a court to
correct a clerical error in a judgment.
6, 2017, Petitioner filed a separate Motion to Vacate Under
28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing that his sentence should be
vacated for different reasons than those discussed in his
Motion to Correct Sentence. (ECF No. 271). On March 12, 2018,
the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate for
the Western District of Arkansas, filed the instant Report
and Recommendation, recommending that the Court deny
Petitioner's Motion to Correct Sentence. (ECF No. 289).
Judge Bryant found that Petitioner's argument is without
merit because, according to the Statement of Reasons entered
by the Court following sentencing, Petitioner's base
offense level was indeed reduced by “2 levels due to
the November 2014 guideline amendments regarding drug
quantities.” (ECF No. 289). Judge Bryant also found
that Petitioner previously raised this same issue in a motion
that was denied on November 13, 2015, by the Honorable P.K.
Holmes, III, Chief District Judge for the Western District of
Arkansas, on the basis that Petitioner already received the
2-level reduction that he sought. Accordingly, Judge Bryant
recommended that the Court deny Petitioner's Motion to
March 28, 2018, Petitioner filed a motion requesting a
thirty-day extension of time to object to the Report and
Recommendation. Although Petitioner did not specify which of
Judge Bryant's two pending Reports and Recommendations he
requested an extension of time to object to, the Court
construed the motion as referring to both of Judge
Bryant's Reports and Recommendations and granted the
extension. On May 3, 2018, Petitioner filed objections to the
Report and Recommendation. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
646(b)(1), the Court will conduct a de novo review
of all issues related to Petitioner's specific
objections are unresponsive to the instant Report and
Recommendation. The objections focus on Judge Bryant's
separate Report and Recommendation that recommends denial of
the section 2255 motion. The only part of Petitioner's
objections that could be applied to the instant Report and
Recommendation is a section in which Petitioner states that
his remaining claims for relief cannot be further expounded
upon, and therefore he stands behind his previous filings to
address the Report and Recommendation.
Court finds that Petitioner's objections offer neither
law nor fact which would cause the Court to deviate from
Judge Bryant's Report and Recommendation. Judge Bryant
correctly notes that the Statement of Reasons filed by the
Court on April 15, 2015, indicates that Petitioner's
“Base Offense Level should be reduced by 2 levels due
to the November 2014 guideline amendments regarding drug
quantities.” (ECF No. 210). Thus, it appears that
Petitioner has already received the two-level reduction he
de novo review of the Report and Recommendation, and
for the reasons discussed above, the Court hereby overrules
Petitioner's objections and adopts the Report and
Recommendation (ECF No. 289) in toto.
Petitioner's Motion to Correct Sentence Pursuant to
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36 (ECF No. 264) is hereby
IS SO ORDERED.
 On March 15, 2018, Judge Bryant filed
a separate Report and Recommendation, recommending that the
Court deny Petitioner's section 2255 motion. (ECF No.
 Petitioner's objections argue that
Judge Bryant erred in recommending that the Court deny the
section 2255 motion without holding an ...