United States v. Alfredo Lopez ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION                          FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       AUG 1 2016
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                         No. 15-10423
    Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 4:11-cr-00337-JGZ
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    ALFREDO LOPEZ,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Arizona
    Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted July 26, 2016**
    Before:        SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    Alfredo Lopez 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. We review de novo whether a district court
    has authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2), see United States v.
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    Leniear, 
    574 F.3d 668
    , 672 (9th Cir. 2009), and we affirm.
    Lopez contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment
    782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. Contrary to Lopez’s contention, the district
    court properly calculated his amended guideline range as 51 to 63 months without
    considering the two-level fast-track departure that the court granted at his original
    sentencing. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(A); United States v. Ornelas, No. 15-
    10522, 
    2016 WL 3126272
    , at *5 (9th Cir. June 3, 2016); see also United States v.
    Rosales-Gonzales, 
    801 F.3d 1177
    , 1180-83 (9th Cir. 2015) (fast-track reduction is
    discretionary departure under the Guidelines). Because Lopez received a sentence
    of 51 months, the district court correctly concluded that Lopez is ineligible for a
    sentence reduction. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) (“[T]he court shall not
    reduce the defendant’s term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C.
    § 3582(c)(2) and this policy statement to a term that is less than the minimum of
    the amended guideline range.”).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    15-10423
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-10423

Judges: Schroeder, Canby, Callahan

Filed Date: 8/1/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024