Case ID: f-appx_551/html/0319-02.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. Juan Manuel PENA-ANGUIANO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-10473.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 17, 2013.
    
    Filed Dec. 30, 2013.
    Laurie K. Gray, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Barbara Valliere, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Juan Manuel Pena-Anguiano, Oxford, WI, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
      
    
   MEMORANDUM

Juan Manuel Pena-Anguiano appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his pro se motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Pena-Anguiano contends that the district court erred by failing to grant his request for a sentence reduction, arguing that he should have received a Guidelines departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1. The government contends that this appeal should be dismissed based on an appeal waiver. We decline to enforce the waiver and instead affirm on the merits. The district court did not err in denying Pena-Anguiano’s request for a sentence reduction because he failed to state a valid legal basis for reducing his sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c).

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