United States v. Anthony Henry
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Anthony Henry appeals 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, see United States v. Wesson, 583 F.3d 728, 730 (9th Cir. 2009), and we affirm.
Henry contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 750, which amended the drug quantity table in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 for offenses involving crack cocaine. However, Henry was sentenced as a career offender pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. Therefore, his sentence was not based on a Guidelines range that has been lowered, and the district court lacked authority to modify his sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); Wesson, 583 F.3d at 731-32.
Because Henry cannot satisfy the first prong of section 3582(c)(2), we need not consider his remaining claims, including his ex post facto challenge to U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 and his eligibility for a sentence modification under the second prong of section 3582(c)(2).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony HENRY, A.K.A. Chris Gadlin, A.K.A. Rickie Grant, A.K.A. Hippo, Defendant-Appellant
- Status
- Unpublished