NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
____________
No. 13-1438
____________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
DIRK LANIEL BARFIELD, JR.,
a/k/a Little D
Dirk Laniel Barfield, Jr.,
Appellant
____________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. No. 09-cr-00093-001)
District Judge: Honorable Nora B. Fischer
____________
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
November 14, 2013
Before: HARDIMAN, SHWARTZ and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges.
(Filed: November 18, 2013)
____________
OPINION
____________
HARDIMAN, Circuit Judge.
Dirk Barfield, Jr., appeals an order of the District Court denying his motion for a
sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(B). We will affirm for the reasons
explained by the District Court.
I
Simply stated, the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (FSA) does not apply to those
whose offense conduct, conviction, and sentence predate its enactment. As the District
Court rightly noted: “the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit have
made clear that the Fair Sentencing Act . . . does not apply to defendants such as Barfield
who were sentenced before its effective date.” App. 11. In support of its decision the
District Court cited Dorsey v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2321 (2012), and United States v.
Turlington, 696 F.3d 425 (3d Cir. 2012). Despite the fact that Dorsey involved a
defendant who was sentenced after the effective date of the FSA, Barfield argues that he
is entitled to relief under that case. But Barfield fails to address our decision in
Turlington, in which we stated that Dorsey “does not address, or disturb, the basic
principle that the FSA does not apply to those defendants who were both convicted and
sentenced prior to the effective date of the FSA.” 696 F.3d at 428. Indeed, Turlington
reaffirmed our prior holding in United States v. Reevey, 631 F.3d 110 (3d Cir. 2010), that
the FSA does not provide “that those sentenced before the FSA’s effective date are to be
re-sentenced.” Id. at 115; see Turlington, 696 F.3d at 428.
2
II
Like the defendant in Turlington, Barfield was both convicted and sentenced prior
to the enactment of the Fair Sentencing Act on August 3, 2010. Accordingly, the FSA is
unavailing to Barfield and we will affirm the order of the District Court.
3