Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-14-15296/USCOURTS-ca11-14-15296-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Billy Cleveland
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-15296

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 0:01-cr-06242-WPD-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BILLY CLEVELAND, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(June 15, 2015)

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JORDAN and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

USCA11 Case: 14-15296 Date Filed: 06/15/2015 Page: 1 of 2
2

Billy Cleveland appeals pro se the denial of his motion for a sentence 

reduction. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Cleveland based his motion on Amendment 782 

to the Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm.

The district court did not err when it denied Cleveland’s motion for a 

reduction of his sentence. Cleveland, whose sentence is based on the career 

offender guideline, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, not on the drug quantity tables, id. § 2D1.1, 

is ineligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782. See United States v. 

Lawson, 686 F.3d 1317, 1321 (11th Cir. 2012); United States v. Moore, 541 F.3d 

1323, 1327–30 (11th Cir. 2008). Cleveland challenges his classification as a career 

offender, but that challenge is outside the limited scope of section 3582(c)(2). See

United States v. Bravo, 203 F.3d 778, 780–81 (11th Cir. 2000).

We AFFIRM the denial of Cleveland’s motion to reduce.

USCA11 Case: 14-15296 Date Filed: 06/15/2015 Page: 2 of 2