United States v. Elias Barrera-Medina

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Elias Barrera-Medina, 671 F. App'x 964 (9th Cir. 2016)
Wallace, Leavy, Fisher

United States v. Elias Barrera-Medina

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Elias Miguel Barrera-Medina 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, and we affirm.

Barrera-Medina contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). The district court correctly concluded that Barrera-Medina is ineligible for a sentence reduction because Amendment 782 did not lower his applicable sentencing range. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); Leniear, 574 F.3d at 673-74.

Barrera-Medina’s challenges to the sentencing court’s drug quantity calculations are not cognizable in a section 3582(c)(2) proceeding. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (section 3582(c)(2) authorizes “only a limited adjustment to an otherwise final sentence and not a plenary resentencing proceeding”).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Reference

Full Case Name
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Elias Miguel BARRERA-MEDINA, Defendant-Appellant
Status
Unpublished