Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-31063/USCOURTS-ca5-15-31063-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mario Burton
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-31063

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIO BURTON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:10-CR-222-12

Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Mario Burton, federal prisoner # 29633-034, appeals the denial of his 18 

U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence for conspiracy to possess with 

intent to distribute cocaine base and cocaine hydrochloride. He argues that 

the district court gave undue weight to his being on supervised release at the 

time he committed the instant offense and made an erroneous assessment of 

his prison disciplinary record in choosing to deny him relief.

 

* 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

September 29, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-31063 Document: 00513697365 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/29/2016
No. 15-31063

2

The district court’s decision whether to reduce a sentence under 

§ 3582(c)(2) is reviewed for an abuse of discretion, while the court’s 

interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines is reviewed de novo and its 

findings of fact for clear error. United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d 667, 672 (5th 

Cir. 2009). The parties do not dispute that Burton is eligible for a reduction 

pursuant to Amendment 782. When determining whether the specific facts of 

an eligible prisoner’s case warrant a reduction, the district court considers the 

applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, the public safety consequences of an 

earlier release, and the prisoner’s post-sentencing conduct. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 

comment. n.1(B)(i)-(iii); see United States v. Robinson, 542 F.3d 1045, 1052 (5th 

Cir. 2008). The specific facts and circumstances of Burton’s case, including his 

prison disciplinary record, the violent nature of his conduct while incarcerated, 

and his commission of the instant offense almost immediately after his release 

to supervision on a prior drug conviction all support the district court’s 

determination that a sentence reduction was unwarranted. Burton has made 

no showing that the district court’s decision was based on a clearly erroneous 

assessment of the evidence or on issues or factors not within its scope of 

discretionary powers. See United States v. Lipscomb, 299 F.3d 303, 339 (5th 

Cir. 2002).

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-31063 Document: 00513697365 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/29/2016