United States v. Jorge Roca-Suarez

Good Law
574 F. App'x 792
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 22, 201413-50393California222 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Jorge Roca-Suarez appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Roca-Suarez contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 591 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir.2009). Contrary to Roca-Suarez’s contention, Amendment 591 did not alter the Guidelines section applicable to his offense of conviction or the calculation of his Guidelines range under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1. See U.S.S.G. app. C, amend. 591 (Supp.2003); see also United States v. McEnry, 659 F.3d 893, 898-99 (9th Cir.2011) (discussing changes made by Amendment 591). Because Amendment 591 did not lower Roca-Suarez’s Guidelines range, the district court lacked authority to reduce his sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2); Leniear, 574 F.3d at 674 .

Roca-Suarez also contends that the district court erred by failing to explain the reasons for its denial of his motion. Because the court had no authority to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.