United States v. Lyle Johns

MEMORANDUM

Lyle Gerald Johns appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3682 (c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Johns contends that his sentence violates Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and that, prior to ruling on his motion for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines, the district court should have corrected this error by recalculating the drug quantities attributable to him. 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). As the district court properly determined, Johns’s Apprendi claim cannot be raised in a 3582(c)(2) proceeding. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 831 , 130 S.Ct. 2683 , 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (alleged sentencing errors are “outside the scope of the proceeding authorized by § 3582(c)(2)”). Moreover, Johns is ineligible for a sentence reduction because Amendment 782 did not lower his applicable sentencing range. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2); Leniear, 574 F.3d at…