Case ID: f-appx_694/html/0763-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ricardo MACIEL, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 17-10571 Non-Argument Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    (August 3, 2017)
    Evelio Jesus Yera, U.S. Attorney’s Office, West Palm Beach, FL, Roy K. Altman, Wifredo A. Ferrer, William C. Healy, Andrea G. Hoffman, Emily M. Smachetti, Evelio Jesus Yera, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Ricardo Maciel, Pro Se
    
      Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, MARCUS and FAY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Ricardo Maciel appeals pro se from the district court’s denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Maciel claims that he is entitled to relief based on Amendment 801 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. We disagree. Section 3582(c)(2) allows relief only in accordance with the policy statements of the Sentencing Commission. And the Commission’s policy statement, which is codified at U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, allows for sentence reductions based only on amendments to the guidelines that are specifically listed in § 1B1.10(d). Because Amendment 801 is not listed there, Maciel is not entitled to relief.'

AFFIRMED.