United States v. Travis Waipa , 667 F. App'x 217 ( 2016 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 22 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 15-10392
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 1:11-cr-00381-JMS
v.
MEMORANDUM*
TRAVIS WAIPA,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
J. Michael Seabright, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 14, 2016**
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Travis Waipa 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. Reviewing de novo, see United States v.
Sykes, 658 F.3d 1140, 1144 (9th Cir. 2011), we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Waipa contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment
782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. In the alternative, he argues that, even if
Amendment 782 does not authorize a reduction in his sentence, the district court
should have resentenced him to 108 months, the bottom of his Guidelines range.
These claims fail. Waipa’s 120-month sentence reflects the mandatory minimum
for his offense. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(viii). The mandatory minimum
applies in section 3582(c)(2) proceedings. See Sykes, 658 F.3d at 1147-48. Thus,
the district court correctly concluded that it had no authority to reduce Waipa's
sentence below 120 months. See id. at 1148.
AFFIRMED.
2 15-10392