govinfo:USCOURTS-cod-1_04-cr-00514-43

OAO 247 (02/08) Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
for the
District of Colorado
United States of America )
)
)
)
)
)
v.
DOESHUN DOTSON
a/k/a “Sean”

USM No: 33260-013
Date of Previous Judgment: December 19, 2006 Thomas R. Ward, Appointed
(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Applicable) Defendant’s Attorney
Order and Amended Judgment Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
Upon motion of X the defendant ’ the Director of the Bureau of Prisons ’ the court under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has
subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 994(u), and having considered such motion,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:
X DENIED. ’ GRANTED and the defendant’s previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in 
the last judgment issued) of is reduced to .
I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE (Prior to Any Departures)
Previous Offense Level: 27 Amended Offense Level: 25
Criminal History Category: II Criminal History Category: II
Previous Guideline Range: 78 to 97 months Amended Guideline Range: 63 to 78 months
II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE
’ The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range.
’ The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the time 
of sentencing as a result of a departure or Rule 35 reduction, and the reduced sentence is comparably less than the
amended guideline range.
XO t h e r (explain): The defendant’s sentence was capped by a statutory maximum sentence which rendered the
guideline calculation moot. The statutory maximum sentence imposed on the defendant was well
below the defendant’s adjusted guideline calculation, rendering the adjusted guideline calculation
moot. 
III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated December 19, 2006, shall remain in effect.
IT IS SO ORDERED
.
s/ Edward W. NottinghamOrder Date: August 21, 2008
Judge’s signature
Effective Date: Edward W. Nottingham, Chief U.S. District Judge
(if different from order date) Printed name and title
Case No. 1:04-cr-00514-SKC Document 1804 filed 08/21/08 USDC Colorado pg
1 of 1

Passage view · GavelSight