AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On December 21, 2021, this Court sentenced Defendant Shawn Garcia principally to a term of imprisonment of 96 months, to be followed by a three-year term of supervised release. Dkt. 71 (“Judgment”) at 2-3; Dkt. 69 (“Sentencing Tr.”) at 50:3-6. Defendant is currently incarcerated at USP Canaan, with a projected release date of November 18, 2027. See Federal Bureau of Prisons, Find an Inmate, https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/ (last visited Feb. 9, 2024). Defendant has moved for a reduction of his sentence “[b]ased [o]n [c]hanges [i]n [t]he Sentencing Guidelines [u]nder [c]riminal [h]istory [e]nhancement,” appearing to refer to Amendment 821 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which went into effect on November 1, 2023 and applies retroactively, as well as for the appointment of counsel for purposes of pursuing that sentence reduction application. Dkt. 110 (“Motion”). Title 18, United States Code, Section 3582(c)(2) provides that in 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 Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(2). Pursuant to Section 1B1.10(b)(1) of the Guidelines, “[i]n determining whether, and to what extent, a reduction in the defendant’s term of imprisonment…is warranted” pursuant to Amendment 821, the Court first “shall determine the amended guideline range that would have been applicable to the defendant if” Amendment 821 “had been in effect at the time the defendant was sentenced.” U.S.S.G. §1B1.10(b)(1). Section 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) then provides that, with an exception not relevant here, “the court shall not reduce the defendant’s term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(2)…to a term that is less than the minimum of the amended guideline range determined under subdivision (1) of this subsection.” Id. §1B1.10(b)(2)(A). Thus, if a defendant was originally sentenced to a term of imprisonment that falls below the low end of the amended Guidelines range, that defendant is ineligible for a reduction under Section 3582(c)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Young, 998 F.3d 43, 46 n.1 (2d Cir. 2021). Defendant is ineligible for a reduction in his sentence pursuant to Amendment 821. As relevant here,1 Amendment 821 modified the calculation of “status points” under U.S.S.G. §4A1.1. Amendment 821 struck the former “status points” provision, which had been at Section 4A1.1(d), and replaced it with language, now at Section 4A1.1(e), which instructs that, in calculating a defendant’s criminal history, a court must: Add 1 point if the defendant (1) receives 7 or more points under subsections (a) through (d), and (2) committed the instant offense while under any criminal justice sentence, including probation, parole, supervised release, imprisonment, work release, or escape status. U.S. Sent’g Comm’n, Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines, 88 Fed. Reg. 28,254, 28,270 (effective Nov. 1, 2023); accord U.S.S.G. §4A1.1(e). At sentencing on December 21, 2021, the Court determined Defendant’s offense level to be 29 and his Criminal History Category to be V, yielding a Guidelines range of 140 to 175 months’ imprisonment. Sentencing Tr. at 8:1-9:7; accord PSR
