Case ID: f-appx_648/html/0746-01.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. Teddy GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-12702
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    April 14, 2016.
    Lunar Claire Alvey, Attorney General’s Office, Christopher Barrett Browne, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Wifredo A. Ferrer, Emily M. Smachétti, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Teddy Garcia, Talladega, AL, pro se.
    Before HULL, MARCUS, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Teddy Garcia appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to reduce his sentence, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). He says that the district court abused its discretion by not considering the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and by classifying him as a career offender. Garcia was not eligible for a sentence reduction, because he was sentenced as a career offender. So the district court did not have the authority to consider the § 3553(a) factors. Furthermore, a § 3582(c)(2) motion cannot be used to challenge his status as a career offender. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010).

AFFIRMED.