NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

AMANDO VILLAREAL HEREDIA, a.k.a.

Gordo, a.k.a. Gordo Villareal, 

a.k.a. Amando Villareal Heredia, 

a.k.a. Armando Villareal Heredia, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-50202 

D.C. No. 3:10-cr-03044-WQH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

William Q. Hayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 13, 2018**

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Amando Villareal Heredia appeals pro se from the district court’s order 

denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We 

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing de novo, see United States v. 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

FEB 16 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-50202 

Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009), we vacate and remand.

Heredia contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under 

Amendment 782, which increased the quantity of actual methamphetamine 

required to trigger the maximum base offense level from 1.5 kilograms to 4.5 

kilograms. See U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(1) (2014). He argues that he no longer 

qualifies for the maximum level because he admitted to conspiring to distribute 

only 1.5 kilograms. Contrary to this contention, the plea agreement reflects that 

Heredia admitted to conspiring to distribute “more than 1.5 kilograms of actual 

methamphetamine.” The district court did not need to, and did not, make a more 

specific quantity determination at sentencing. Under these circumstances, the 

district court properly attempted to determine the total drug quantity attributable to 

Heredia in order to determine his eligibility for a sentence reduction. See United 

States v. Mercado-Moreno, 869 F.3d 942, 957-58 (9th Cir. 2017).

Nevertheless, we vacate the district court’s order denying Heredia’s motion and 

remand for the court to reconsider its quantity determination in light of MercadoMoreno, which was decided after the district court’s decision. While the district 

court observed that at least 100 pounds of methamphetamine were seized by 

investigators, it did not determine what portion of that quantity, if any, was the 

result of Heredia’s direct involvement or reasonably foreseeable to him as within 

the scope of the conspiracy in which he participated. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1), 
3 17-50202 

cmt. n.2 (2014); Mercado-Moreno, 869 F.3d at 959-60. Upon remand, the court 

shall determine whether it is more likely than not that Heredia is responsible for 

the new quantity threshold of 4.5 kilograms of actual methamphetamine or 45 

kilograms of methamphetamine mixture, see Mercado-Moreno, 869 F.3d at 957, 

and assess Heredia’s eligibility for a sentence reduction accordingly.

In light of this disposition, we do not reach Heredia’s remaining claims.

VACATED and REMANDED.