Case ID: f-appx_464/html/0577-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Leon JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-10085.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 19, 2011.
    
    Filed Dec. 27, 2011.
    Laurel J. Montoya, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USF-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Fresno, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Francine Zepeda, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fresno, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Anthony Leon Johnson, pro se.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Anthony Leon Johnson appeals from the denial of his motion to reconsider his 240-month sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Johnson contends that the district court improperly denied his motion to reconsider his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) by failing to consider a sentence outside of the career offender guidelines. The district court did not have jurisdiction to resentence Johnson based on his § 3582(c) motion because Johnson was sentenced pursuant to Guideline § 4B 1.1. See United States v. Wesson, 583 F.3d 728, 730-32 (9th Cir.2009).

Johnson also contends that his sentence was substantively unreasonable. In Johnson’s previous appeal, this court already determined that his 240-month sentence was reasonable.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.