Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-16-10033/USCOURTS-ca5-16-10033-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Douglas Jackson
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-10033

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

DOUGLAS JACKSON,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:06-CR-10-3

Before BARKSDALE, GRAVES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Douglas Jackson, federal prisoner # 34028-177, proceeding pro se on appeal 

from the denial of his motion for a sentence reduction, pleaded guilty, with a 

written plea agreement, to possession, with intent to distribute, 500 grams or 

more of a mixture containing a detectable amount of cocaine, in violation of 21 

U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). Although Jackson was determined to be a career 

offender, the court calculated his sentencing range based on his offense level, 

 

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. 

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 9, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-10033 Document: 00513629406 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2016
No. 16-10033

2

under Guideline § 2D1.1, because it was higher than the career-offender offense 

level, under Guideline § 4B1.1. Prior to the motion at issue, Jackson successfully

moved to reduce his sentence, lowering his base offense level to 34, under § 2D1.1, 

the same as his career-offender offense level, under § 4B1.1. 

The district court denied the instant 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion pursuant 

to Amendment 782, concluding Jackson was ineligible for the reduction. In 

challenging that denial and his motion for reconsideration, Jackson asserts he is 

eligible for a sentence reduction based on that amendment. 

The court’s authority to reduce a sentence pursuant to § 3582(c)(2) is 

reviewed de novo. United States v. Jones, 596 F.3d 273, 276 (5th Cir. 2010). 

Section 3582(c)(2) allows a district court to reduce a defendant’s sentence if he was 

sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that 

subsequently was lowered by an amendment to the advisory Guidelines. United 

States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 237 (5th Cir. 2009). Amendment 782, which is 

retroactive, reduced the base-offense levels for crack-cocaine offenses. See 

U.S.S.G., Supp. to App. C., Amends. 782, 788.

Nevertheless, that Jackson’s offense level has been reduced, alone, does not

entitle him to a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Banks, 

770 F.3d 346, 349 (5th Cir. 2014). Although Amendment 782 would reduce 

Jackson’s § 2D1.1 offense level, the court’s determining it would use Jackson’s

career-offender offense level of 34, under § 4B1.1(b), because it is higher than that 

produced by § 2D1.1 following the amendment, was proper. Id. at 348–49. 

Jackson’s sentencing range remains unchanged by the amendment; therefore, the 

court correctly determined it lacked authority under § 3582(c)(2) to lower his

sentence. See id.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 16-10033 Document: 00513629406 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/09/2016