Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-15-11716/USCOURTS-ca11-15-11716-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
James A. McGee
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 15-11716

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 0:93-cr-06104-DTKH-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

 versus

JAMES A. MCGEE,

a.k.a. James Allen McGee, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(December 2, 2015)

Before WILSON, WILLIAM PRYOR and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

USCA11 Case: 15-11716 Date Filed: 12/02/2015 Page: 1 of 2
2

James McGee appeals the denial of his motion to reduce his sentence. 18 

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). McGee sought a reduction based on Amendment 782 to the 

Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied McGee’s 

motion because Amendment 782 did not alter his sentencing range. At sentencing, 

the district court found, over McGee’s objection, that he was responsible for 

17,593 grams of ephedrine that could be used to produce 16.18 kilograms of pure 

methamphetamine. See U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(a)(3)(C)(1). Based on that drug quantity, 

McGee was ineligible for a sentence reduction because his base offense level

remained unchanged. Id. § 2D1.1(c)(1) (assigning a base offense level of 38 for 

cases involving 4.5 kilograms or more of methamphetamine). McGee argues that 

he was entitled to an evidentiary hearing to challenge the amount of 

methamphetamine attributed to him, but the district court could not disturb its 

earlier finding about drug quantity when considering McGee’s motion to reduce. 

See United States v. Bravo, 203 F.3d 778, 780 (11th Cir. 2000). Because McGee 

was ineligible for a reduction of his sentence, the district court lacked the authority 

to consider the statutory sentencing factors or to exercise its discretion to impose a 

new sentence. Id. at 781.

We AFFIRM the denial of McGee’s motion to reduce his sentence.

USCA11 Case: 15-11716 Date Filed: 12/02/2015 Page: 2 of 2