United States v. Oswaldo Zuniga-Sanchez , 678 F. App'x 602 ( 2017 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 27 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-30028
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00023-DWM
v.
MEMORANDUM*
OSWALDO ZUNIGA-SANCHEZ, a.k.a.
Oswaldo Sanchez,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 14, 2017**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Oswaldo Zuniga-Sanchez appeals pro se from the district court’s order
granting in part Zuniga-Sanchez’s 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.
*
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).
The district court reduced Zuniga-Sanchez’s sentence to 120 months, which
reflects the mandatory minimum for his offense. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A).
Zuniga-Sanchez contends that he is entitled to a further reduction. We review de
novo a district court’s refusal to depart below the mandatory minimum. See United
States v. Sykes, 658 F.3d 1140, 1144 (9th Cir. 2011). Because the mandatory
minimum applies in section 3582(c)(2) proceedings, the district court correctly
concluded that it could not reduce Zuniga-Sanchez’s sentence any further than it
did. See Sykes, 658 F.3d at 1148.
Zuniga-Sanchez’s challenge to the district court’s denial of safety valve
relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) is not cognizable in this proceeding. See Dillon v.
United States, 560 U.S. 817, 831 (2010) (only aspects of the sentence affected by
the amendment may be raised in section 3582(c)(2) proceedings).
AFFIRMED.
2 16-30028