Whether the district court erred in denying Mr. Reid a fair hearing for resentencing and failing to bring him back to court for the application of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ) When the {*Oircutt Court of Mppeak Vacatdlanch Romanded ) thes Lack to the Distnic Cart shauldat the district Court hawe given Mr, Red a Fair heaving for resentencihg, yNotte. Gand brent Ins body back te Cort so he could be present;seauredl Coonse\ to represent nim in the Application of the Faic Sentercihg fetot-201g% to Cant, A) Bylaw Ye District Court Cannat deny Mr Reid the Application. ot dhe law Fac Semencins Actot 2010) ts relreaplively Applicable te Cont ) hecause Mr eid was charyel) with a Covtred oReinge® | underthe FSA, | \ . i BD) Since the Feat Couct of Appeals made a deorsion +o eee Remand Case 19-7603 for reconsiderrtins shaulditt | he FSA 1D Mr, Ren Udo Was Clearly. eligible Rr relref. and GO Ap\\ reserbenc Ng, ) Dishick Cat vidlated the Mandate rate on Caset* 47803 reek ecg ) relief SYM lishtol the Fain Sentencing Achat! D010! Count: <onbe nes Vocotel Sentence, Convchen on aed mast be dismitsed (a) A \dhadl right to Cullen the Use s Amended) Corde e Calcu ort fed Ain accach uith-the Meledtén ob the Peso Seth Oe es Wight to olyiect to the Amended Cuibeline Calet ating