United States v. Reginald Lashawn Sawyer

Case: 16-17679 Date Filed: 01/03/2019 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-17679
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 2:06-cr-00298-WKW-SRW-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
REGINALD LASHAWN SAWYER,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Alabama
________________________
(January 3, 2019)
Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 16-17679 Date Filed: 01/03/2019 Page: 2 of 3
Reginald Lashawn Sawyer appeals the district court’s sua sponte
determination that he is not eligible for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2). Sawyer contends on appeal that: (1) he is eligible for a sentence
reduction under § 3582(c)(2) because the Sentencing Commission, through
Amendment 782, subsequently lowered the Guidelines ranges applicable to his
sentence, as calculated under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c); and (2) the district court
abused its discretion by determining Sawyer would not be entitled to a sentence
reduction even if he were eligible under § 3582(c)(2). We need not address
Sawyer’s second contention because we conclude Sawyer was ineligible for relief
under § 3582(c)(2).
A defendant may be entitled to a reduced sentence under § 3582(c)(2) if he
“has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that
has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission.” 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (emphasis added). While this appeal was pending, the Supreme Court
issued its opinion in Koons v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1783 (2018). Koons held
that sentences are not “based on” Guidelines ranges that subsequently have been
lowered by the Sentencing Commission” if “the ranges play[ed] no relevant part in
the judge’s determination of the defendant’s ultimate sentence.” Id. at 1788(quotation and alteration omitted). Because the petitioners in Koons received
sentences “based on” mandatory minimums and substantial assistance to the
2
Case: 16-17679 Date Filed: 01/03/2019 Page: 3 of 3
Government, and not on Guidelines ranges that subsequently were lowered by the
Sentencing Commission, the petitioners did not qualify for reduced sentences
under § 3582(c)(2). Id.
Koons is dispositive of Sawyer’s appeal. Like the petitioners in Koons,
Sawyer’s sentence was based on mandatory minimums and substantial assistance
to the Government. The Guidelines ranges for Sawyer’s drug offenses, which
subsequently have been lowered by the Sentencing Commission, “play[ed] no
relevant part in the judge’s determination of [Sawyer’s] ultimate sentence.” Id.
Consequently, Sawyer is not eligible for a reduced sentence under § 3582(c)(2).
AFFIRMED.
3