Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-50695/USCOURTS-ca5-15-50695-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jose Marquez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-50695

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE MARQUEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 6:10-CR-242-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Marquez, federal prisoner # 42452-177, who was convicted of

conspiracy to distribute at least 500 grams of methamphetamine and five 

kilograms of cocaine and conspiracy to commit money laundering, moves for 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. He seeks to challenge the

denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion in which he sought a sentence 

 

* 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

June 21, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-50695 Document: 00513555617 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2016
No. 15-50695

2

reduction pursuant to Sentencing Guidelines Amendments 782 and 788, which 

retroactively lowered certain offense levels under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c).

Marquez was responsible for more than the quantity of marijuana that 

triggers the highest base offense level under both the version of § 2D1.1(c) in 

effect when he was sentenced and the retroactive, amended version. 

Accordingly, Amendments 782 and 788 did not change his offense level or lower 

his guidelines range, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in 

denying him a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2). See U.S.S.G. 

§ 1B1.10(a)(2)(B); United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d 667, 672 (5th Cir. 2009).

Because the appeal lacks arguable merit and is therefore frivolous, 

Marquez’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and his 

appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 

n.24 (5th Cir. 1997); Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH 

CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-50695 Document: 00513555617 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2016