United States v. William Strong ( 2018 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 3 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-10100
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00078-JAM
v.
WILLIAM STRONG, a.k.a. Wee Wee MEMORANDUM*
Strong, a.k.a. William Henry Strong, a.k.a.
Wee Wee,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 27, 2018**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
William Strong appeals from the district court’s denial of his amended
motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a sentence reduction. 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).
Strong contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under
Amendment 782 to the Guidelines because recent California state court orders,
which reclassified his previous drug felony convictions as misdemeanors, have
affected his designation as a career offender. We review de novo whether the
district court had authority to reduce a defendant’s sentence under section 3582.
See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009).
Strong’s challenge to his career offender designation is not cognizable under
section 3582(c)(2), which authorizes sentencing reductions solely where the
defendant’s Guidelines range has been lowered by an amendment to the
Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(1), (b)(1); Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S.
817, 831 (2010). The district court properly concluded that Strong was ineligible
for a reduction because Amendment 782 did not affect his status as a career
offender, and therefore did not lower his Guidelines range. See United States v.
Wesson, 583 F.3d 728, 731 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 18-10100