Sealed v. Sealed ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                           REVISED March 15, 2016
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 15-50548                                   FILED
    Summary Calendar                             March 8, 2016
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    SEALED APPELLEE,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    SEALED APPELLANT,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Texas
    USDC No. 1:12-CR-254
    Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Defendant-Appellant (Appellant) appeals from the district court’s denial
    of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion seeking a reduction of his 40-month
    sentence for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base.                  Appellant
    sought a modification of his sentence based on Amendment 782 to the
    Sentencing Guidelines.
    * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
    CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    No. 15-50548
    Appellant argues that the district court erred in denying his § 3582(c)(2)
    motion because it gave excessive weight to his lengthy criminal history and did
    not adequately consider the other 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors or his mitigating
    arguments.    We review for abuse of discretion a district court’s decision
    whether to reduce a sentence pursuant to § 3582(c)(2). United States v. Evans,
    
    587 F.3d 667
    , 672 (5th Cir. 2009).
    The district court was not under any obligation to reduce Appellant’s
    sentence. See 
    Evans, 587 F.3d at 673
    . In the instant case, the record shows
    that the district court gave due consideration to the § 3582(c) motion as a
    whole, listened to Appellant’s mitigating arguments, and considered the
    § 3553(a) factors, including Appellant’s criminal history and the danger he
    posed to the community; thus, there is no abuse of discretion. See 
    Evans, 587 F.3d at 672-73
    & n.11; United States v. Whitebird, 
    55 F.3d 1007
    , 1009-10 (5th
    Cir. 1995).
    Accordingly, the order of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-50548

Filed Date: 3/17/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 3/17/2016