United States v. Alfonso Reyes

MEMORANDUM

Alfonso Cervantes Reyes 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.

The government objects to the timeliness of the appeal. Construing Cervantes Reyes’s pro se filings liberally, see Orona v. United States, 826 F.3d 1196, 1199 (9th Cir. 2016), we treat his motion to vacate the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction as a motion for reconsideration. So treated, Cervantes Reyes’s notice of appeal was timely filed. See United States v. Belgarde, 300 F.3d 1177, 1180 (9th Cir. 2002) (“A motion for reconsideration is timely if it is filed within the time for appeal ... and an appeal is timely if it is filed within the time to appeal after the denial of the motion for reconsideration.”)

Cervantes Reyes 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). Assuming without deciding that Cervantes…