Anthony Lightfoot, Jr. v. United States ( 2020 )

Case: 19-10704 Document: 00515670348 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/11/2020
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
December 11, 2020
No. 19-10704 Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
Anthony Wayne Lightfoot, Jr.,
Petitioner—Appellant,
versus
United States of America,
Respondent—Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:19-CV-447
USDC No. 4:08-CR-3-1
Before Davis, Stewart, and Dennis, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Anthony Wayne Lightfoot, Jr., federal prisoner # 36905-177, appeals
the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion pursuant to
the First Step Act of 2018; Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 404, 132 Stat. 5194 (2018).
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 19-10704 Document: 00515670348 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/11/2020
No. 19-10704
Lightfoot seeks a reduction to his sentence of 233 months in prison, imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction of possession of more than five grams of
cocaine base with intent to distribute, see 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B)(iii),
and Lightfoot’s successful § 3582(c)(2) motion based on Amendment 782 to
the Sentencing Guidelines.
Section 404 of the First Step Act gives courts the discretion to apply
the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (“FAIR”) to reduce a prisoner’s sentence
for certain covered offenses. See United States v. Hegwood, 934 F.3d 414, 416-
17 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 140 S. Ct. 285 (2019); First Step Act of 2018; Pub.
L. No. 115-391, § 404, 132 Stat. 5194 (2018). Although this court generally
reviews a district court’s decision whether to reduce a sentence pursuant to
the First Step Act for abuse of discretion, de novo review applies “to the
extent the court’s determination turns on the meaning of a federal statute
such as the [First Step Act of 2018].” United States v. Jackson, 945 F.3d 315,
319 & n.2 (5th Cir. 2019) (quotation at 319; internal quotation marks and
citation omitted).
Because a reduction under Amendment 782 is not a reduction in
accordance with sections 2 and 3 of the Fair Sentencing Act, United States v.
Stewart, 964 F.3d 433, 439 (5th Cir. 2020), that prior reduction does not bar
the district court’s consideration of Lightfoot’s motion, see First Step Act,
§ 404(c), 132 Stat. 5194, 5222; Jackson, 945 F.3d at 318-20. Likewise,
Lightfoot’s other two prior § 3582(c)(2) motions, filed before the enactment
of, and not relying on, the First Step Act, do not render Lightfoot ineligible
for a sentence reduction under the Act. See First Step Act, § 404(c), 132 Stat.
5194, 5222.
Because Lightfoot’s offense of conviction is a covered offense for
purposes of the First Step Act of 2018, see Jackson, 945 F.3d at 318-20, we
VACATE and REMAND the instant matter for the district court to
2
Case: 19-10704 Document: 00515670348 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/11/2020
No. 19-10704
consider, within its discretion, Lightfoot’s motion in light of the First Step
Act, including changes to the relevant statutory maximum and minimum
terms of imprisonment. See Jackson, 945 F.3d at 318-20.
3