Case ID: f-appx_624/html/0587-01.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. Raul CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-10102.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 9, 2015.
    
    Filed Dec. 15, 2015.
    Kathleen Anne Servatius, Assistant U.S., D.O.J.-USAO, Fresno, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Raul Chavez, Oakdale, LA, pro se.
    Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Raul Chavez 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.

Chavez 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). Contrary to Chavez’s contention, Amendment 782 did not lower his offense level calculation under U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(c). See U.S.S.G. app. C, amend. 782 (Supp. 2014). Thus, the district court lacked authority to reduce his sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); Lerdear, 574 F.3d at 674.

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