United States v. Raul Amezcua

MEMORANDUM

Raul Amezcua appeals 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.

Amezcua contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 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). The district court correctly concluded that Amezcua 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 673-74 . Because the district court lacked authority to reduce Amezcua’s sentence, it had no cause to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) factors. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826-27 , 130 S.Ct. 2683 , 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010). Moreover, contrary to Amézcua’s contention, Booker did not give the court authority to lower Amezcua’s sentence. See Dillon, 560 U.S. at 828 , 130 S.Ct. 2683 (proceedings under section 3582(c)(2) “do not implicate the interests identified in Booker”). Finally,…