T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. DA VI D S OMP E T T P OWE R S , AK A Joker, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 08- 30389 D C N o . C R 9 7 - 0 1 0 5 J WS ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A l a s ka J ohn W . S e dw i c k, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d J a nua ry11, 2010

S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on S ubm i s s i on V a c a t e d O c t obe r1, 2010 R e s ubm i tt e d A ugus t8, 2011 B efo re: K L E IN F E L D , T A S H IM A , an d T A L L M A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. D ef endantD avi d S om pettP ow er s app ea l s the deni al of hi s m ot i on t o reduce hi s s e nt e nc e pur s uantt o 18 U . S . C . § 3582( c ) ( 2) . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 

# FI LED SEP 01 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSI n l i ghtof ourhol di ng i n U

ni te d State s v . L e ni e ar , 574 F . 3d 668, 672 1 (9th C i r. 20 09 ), thata pl eaagre em ent ’ s w ai ver of the ri gh t“ t o app ea l the se nt ence .

. . i m pos e d” doe s note nc om pa s s the r i ghtt o appe a l the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s c onc l us i on tha ti tl a c ke d j ur i s di c t i on t o m odi f ythe s e nt e nc e pur s ua ntt o § 3582( c ) ( 2) ) , the go vernm enthas aband on ed i t s argum entthatthe appeal w ai ver i n P ow er s’ pl ea a g r e e m e n t b a r s th is ap p e a l.

R ul e 11( e ) ( 1) ( C ) ha s s i nc e be e n r e c odi f i e d a s R ul e 11( c ) ( 1) ( C ) . T he 2 o n lyc h a n g e s a r e s ty lis tic . Se e I n r e Mor gan , 50 6 F . 3d 70 5, 70 9 n . 1 (9th C i r. 20 07 ).

- 2- U . S . C . § 1291, a nd w e r e ve r s e a nd r e m a nd. 1 I n O c t obe r1997, P ow e r s w a s i ndi c t e d i n aF i r s tS upe r s e di ng I ndi c tm e ntf or one c ountof

c ons pi r a c y , i n vi ol a t i on of 21 U . S . C . § 846; f

ourt e e n c ount s of di s tr i but i ng, orpos s e s s i ng w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e , c oc a i ne pow de ra nd c oc a i ne ba s e ( “ c r a c k c oc a i ne ” ) , i n vi ol a t i on of 21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) ; tw o c ount s of us i ng a n d c a rry in g af

ir e a rm d u r in g ad ru g tr a f f ic k in g c r im e , in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § 9 2 4 ( c ) ( 1 ) ; a n d o n e c o u n to f p o s s e s s i o n o f

s t o l e n f i r e a rms , i n v i o l a t i o n o f

1 8 U . S. C. § 9 2 2 ( j ) . Pu r s u a n tt o aFe d e r a l Ru l e o f Cr i mi n a l Pr o c e d u r e 1 1 ( e ) ( 1 ) ( C) 2 agre em ent , P ow er s a gree d t o p l ea d g ui l ty t o a si ng l e c ou ntof i nt entt o d i stri bu t e a S c he dul e I I c ontr ol l e d s ubs t a nc e i n e xc ha nge f orthe gove rnm e nt ’ s di s m i s s a l of the r e m a i ni ng c ount s . T he di s tr i c tc ourta c c e pt e d the a gr e e m e nta nd i m pos e d the s tip u la te d s e n te n c e o f

2 1 0 m o n th s . E f f e c t i ve N ove m be r1, 2007, the S e nt e nc i ng C om m i s s i on a m e nde d the- 3-

s e n te n c in g g u id e lin e a f

f e c tin g c r a c kc o c a in e c o n v ic tio n s , r e d u c in g b ytw o le v e ls th e ap p lic ab le b a s e o f

f e n s e le v e ls a s s ig n e d to v a r io u s q u a n titie s o f c r a c kc o c a in e . See U . S . S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s M a nua l ( “ U S S G ” ) S upp. A pp. C , A m e nd. 706 ( e f f e c tiv e N o v . 1 , 2 0 0 7 ) ( m o d if y in g U S S G § 2 D 1 .1 ) ; s e e al s o L e ni e ar , 57 4 F . 3d at 6 7 2 - 7 3 . I n 2 0 0 8 , th e C o m m is s io n m a d e th e a m e n d m e n t r e tr o a c tiv e . See U SSG S u p p . A p p . C , A m e n d . 7 1 3 ( e f f e c tiv e M a r . 3 , 2 0 0 8 ) ; se e al so D i l lon v. U

ni ted States , 1 3 0 S .C t. 2 6 8 3 , 2 6 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) . P ow er s m ov ed the courtt o reduce hi s s ent ence pu rs uantt o § 35 82 (c )( 2), w hi ch gi ves the di stri ctcourtthe autho ri ty t o m od i fya s ent ence “ i n the ca se of a de f e nda ntw ho ha s be e n s e nt e nc e d t o at e rm of i m pr i s onm e ntba s e d on a s e nt e nc i ng r a nge tha tha s s ubs e que nt l ybe e n l ow e r e d bythe S e nt e nc i ng C om m i ss i on . ” I

d. T he di s tr i c tc ourtde ni e d the m ot i on, c onc l udi ng tha ti tdi d not h a v e th e au th o r i tyt o mo d i f yas e n t e n c e i mp o s e d p u r s u a n tt o aRu l e 1 1 ( e ) ( 1 ) ( C) a g r e e m e n t. I n Fre em an v. U

ni ted States , 1 3 1 S .C t. 2 6 8 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) , th e C o u rt r e c e n tly de c i de d tha ts om e s e nt e nc e s i m pos e d pur s ua ntt o aR ul e 11( e ) ( 1) ( C ) a gr e e m e nt qua l i f ya s “ ba s e d on” the s e nt e nc i ng gui de l i ne s f orthe purpos e s of

a§ 3582( c ) ( 2) m o d if ic a tio n . P ur s ua ntt o Fr e e m an , the gove rnm e ntha s c onf e s s e d e rr ora nd m ove d t o r e m a nd thi s c a s e “ s o tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtc a n c ons i de r[ P ow e r s ’ ] m ot i on- 4-

f orr e duc t i on of

s e nt e nc e pur s ua ntt o 18 U . S . C . § 3582( c ) . ” W e a gr e e w i th the g o v ern m en t’ s c o n ce ss io n th at P o w er s’ p lea a g re em en t “ m ee ts Ju stice S o to m ay o r’s de s c r i pt i on [ i n he rc onc urr i ng opi ni on] of ‘ C ’ a gr e e m e nt s tha tne ve rthe l e s s c a n be c o n s id e r e d to b e b a s e d u p o n as e n te n c in g r a n g e . . . .” A c c o r d in g ly , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s o r d e rd e n y in g P o w e r s ’ m o tio n to r e d u c e h is s e nt e nc e i s r e ve r s e d a nd the c a s e i s r e m a nde d f orf urthe rpr oc e e di ngs c ons i s t e nt w i th Fr e e m an. RE V E RS E D a n d RE MAND E D.