Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-16-10480/USCOURTS-ca5-16-10480-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Sergio Perez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-10480

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SERGIO PEREZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:08-CR-185-4

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and CLEMENT and SOUTHWICK, Circuit 

Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Sergio Perez, federal prisoner # 38176-177, pleaded guilty to conspiracy 

to possess with the intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and 

was sentenced to 235 months of imprisonment to be followed by a five-year 

term of supervised release. United States v. Perez, 442 F. App’x 952, 953 (5th 

Cir. 2011). Perez filed a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a modification 

 

* 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

November 18, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-10480 Document: 00513765656 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/18/2016
No. 16-10480

2

of his sentence in light of Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The 

district court granted the motion and reduced Perez’s sentence to 188 months 

in prison. Perez moved under § 3582(c)(2) for another modification of his 

sentence, this time under Amendment 775 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The 

district court denied relief, determining that Perez was not qualified for a 

reduction. 

Section 3582(c)(2) permits the discretionary modification of a defendant’s 

sentence “[i]n the case of a defendant who has been sentenced to a term of 

imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered 

by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. [§] 994(o),” so long as the 

reduction is consistent with the applicable policy statements. § 3582(c)(2); see 

United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 237 (5th Cir. 2009). Section 3582(c)(2) 

applies only to retroactive guidelines amendments as set forth in U.S.S.G. 

§ 1B1.10. Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826 (2010). We review de novo 

whether a district court has authority to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2). 

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

Perez’s § 3582(c)(2) motion was based on Amendment 775 to the 

Sentencing Guidelines. Amendment 775 is not included in the list of 

amendments set forth in § 1B1.10(d). Accordingly, Perez was not eligible for 

relief under § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 775, and the district court did 

not err in denying his motion. See Jones, 596 F.3d at 276.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 16-10480 Document: 00513765656 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/18/2016