Case ID: f-appx_471/html/0547-01.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, Appellee, v. James Lee BROWN, Appellant.
    No. 11-3584.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 5, 2012.
    Filed: July 10, 2012.
    Amy L. Jennings, Special, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Appellee.
    James Lee Brown, Lisbon, OH, pro se. Bernard John Burns, III, Assistant, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Appellant.
    Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

James Brown appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) sentence-reduction motion based on Amendment 750 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm, as Brown’s applicable Guidelines range was not lowered by the amendment. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, comment. (n.l(A)) (eligibility for consideration under § 3582(c)(2) is triggered only by amendment that lowers applicable Guidelines range); United States v. Tolliver, 570 F.3d 1062, 1066-67 (8th Cir.2009) (where applicable Guidelines range was not lowered by amendment, district court lacked authority to reduce sentence). To the extent Brown has raised arguments that are not based on a Guidelines amendment, those arguments are not properly raised in a section 3582(c)(2) motion.

The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. 
      
      . The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.