United States v. Betty Francois ( 2019 )

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 18-3726
___________________________
United States of America,
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,
v.
Betty Francois,
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport
____________
Submitted: July 19, 2019
Filed: July 24, 2019
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, WOLLMAN, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Betty Francois pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement under Federal Rule
of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C), and the district court sentenced her according to
that agreement. She now appeals after the district court1 denied her renewed motion
for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on a retroactively
lowered sentencing range under the Sentencing Guidelines. Her motion was based
on Amendment 782 to the Guidelines, and relied on Hughes v. United States, 138 S.
Ct. 1765 (2018), which clarified that plea agreements under Rule 11(c)(1)(C) do not
foreclose eligibility for § 3582(c)(2) relief. In counseled and pro se briefs, Francois
argues that the district court erred in denying her a sentence reduction. Appointed
counsel has also moved for leave to withdraw.
We conclude that the district court did not err in denying Francois a sentence
reduction under section 3582(c)(2). First, the record shows that the sentence was not
based on the Guidelines. See Hughes, 138 S. Ct. at 1775-76. Further, Amendment
782 would not afford Francois relief under section 3582(c)(2), because the amended
Guidelines would have no effect on her Guidelines range. See U.S.S.G.
§§ 1B1.10(a)(2)(B), (b)(1) & comment. (n.1).
Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we affirm.
______________________________
1
The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the
Southern District of Iowa.
-2-