[DO N OT PUBLISH]
IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 2- 12 48 6 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd er

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :9 5- cr-0 06 05 -PAS-2 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff - App el le e, ve rs us JOSE M ANUEL SAL DANA, a.k .a. Po pe y e, a.k .a. Jo hn Gotti , a.k .a. Jo se So to , a.k .a. Py e, a.k .a. Em anue l Sa nt a, Defen da nt- App el la nt .

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e So uthe rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Au gu st23 , 20 12 ) Case: 12-12486 Date Filed: 08/23/2012 Page: 1 of 4Befo re CARNES, HULL andMARTIN, Ci rcu itJu dg es .

PER CURI AM: Jo se Sal da nawas c on vi ct edof o ne co un t o f co ns pi racy to p os se ss with in te ntto di st rib ut e a co nt ro ll edsubs ta nc e in vi ol at io n o f 21 U.S.C. § 8 46 an d t wo co un ts of p os se ss io n wi th in te ntto di st rib ut e a co nt ro ll edsubs ta nc e in vi ol at io n o f 21 U.S.C. § 8 41 (a)( 1) . Becau se Sal danaha d two p rio r fel on y dru g c on vi ct io ns , he was subjec t t o am an da to ry m in im um li fe s en te nc e. See 2 1 U.S.C. § § 84 1( b) (1 )(A), 8 51 . The p res en te nc e in ve st ig at io n re po rt c on cl ud edth atSal da na was res po ns ib le forat l eas t 1 .5 k il og ram s o f cra ckco cai ne , whi ch m ad e h is ba se of fen se lev el 38 . See Un it edSta te s Se nt en ci ng Gui de li ne s § 2D1 .1(c )(1 ) (No v. 19 95 ). Sal da narece iv eda 2- le ve l i nc reas e u nd er § 2D1 .1(b )(1 ); a4-l ev el in crea se un de r § 3 B1 .1(a ); a nda 2- le ve l i nc reas e und er § 3C 1.1 . Sald an a’s to ta l o ffen se le ve l was 46 , bu t b ecau se th e h ig he stoff en se lev el th atth e se nt en ci ng tab le reco gn iz es is 43 , th e co urt treat edSal da naas h av in g ato ta l o ffen se lev el of 4 3. See i d. ch . 5, p t. A cmt. n .2. Sal da na ’s cri m in al hi st ory cat eg ory was IV, wh ic h res ul te d i n agu id el in es ran ge of l ife in pri so n. Th e d is tri ctco urt s en te nc ed Sal da nato li fe i n p ris on on eachco un t, wi th each sen te nc e to run co nc urren tl y . 1 Saldana wa s also convicted of three counts of usinga fire arm during and in re lation to a 1 drugtraff ickingcrime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) . The district cour t sentence d Saldana to 5 year s in prison on eac h of those counts, with the sente nces to run c onsecutively to eac h other 2 Case: 12-12486 Date Filed: 08/23/2012 Page: 2 of 4Sal da nafil eda pr o s e m ot io n t o re du ce h is sen te nc e u nd er 1 8 U.S.C. §

35 82 (c)( 2) , con te nd in g t ha t Am en dm en ts 75 0 a nd59 9 t o t he gu id el in es ha d reduc edhi s g ui de li ne s ra ng e. The d is tri ctco urt d en ie d t ha t m ot io n, co nc lu di ng th atitlac ke d aut ho rit y

to reduc e Sal da na ’s sen te nc e b ecau se Sal da nais subjec t t o a m an da to ry

m in im um li fe s en te nc e. Thi s i s Sa ld an a’s ap pe al . The di stric t co urt d idno t err in de nyin g S al da na ’s § 3 58 2( c)(2 ) m ot io n. Sal da naco nt en ds th atAm en dm en t 7 50 lo weredhi s b as e o ffen se lev el to 34 an d th atAm en dm en t 5 99 rem ov edth e 2 -le ve l i nc reas e h e rec ei ve d u nd er § 2D1 .1(b )(1 ). Bas edon th os e am en dm en ts , he a rg ue s, h is am en de d t ot al off en se le ve l i s 4 0. We will ass um e th atSal da nais rig htab ou t tha t ca lc ul at io n. A to ta l of fen se lev el of 4 0 andcri m in al hi st ory cat eg ory of I V us ua ll y

lea ds to a gu id el in es ran ge of 3 60 m on th s t o l ife . Sald an a, ho wev er, i s s ub ject t o a m an da to ry

m in im um li fe s en te nc e. Becaus e th atm an da to ry m in im um is ab ov e th e 36 0- m on th bo tt om

of h is ot he rwis e-ap pl ic ab le am en de d g ui de li ne s ra ng e, th at m an da to ry

m in im um be co m es th e b ot to m

of h is am en de d g ui de li ne s ra ng e. See U.S.S.G. § 5 G1.1 (c)( 2) . So, ev enass um in g Am en dm en ts 75 0 a nd59 9 l owe redhi s to ta l o ffen se lev el , th os e am en dm en ts di d n otlo wer h is ori gi na l g ui de li ne s rang e and to the sente nces f

or the thre e drug

convictions. Saldana later filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate the se ntence s on two of the fire arm c ounts, which the district court grante d. The re maining f

irea rm sentenc e is not at issue in this appeal. 3 Case: 12-12486 Date Filed: 08/23/2012 Page: 3 of 4of

li fe i n p ris on . For t ha t re as on , th e d is tri ctco urt l ack edau th or it y to reduc e h is se nt en ce u nd er 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 82 (c)( 2) . See Un it edSta te s v . Glo ve r, — F.3 d — , No. 1 2- 10 58 0, 2 01 2 WL 28 14 30 3, at*3 (11 th Cir . Ju ly 11, 2 01 2) (“ [A] cou rt can no t u se anam en dm en t t o re du ce a s en te nc e ina pa rti cu la r cas e u nl es s t ha t am en dm en t ac tu al ly lower s the gu id el in es ran ge in th atcas e.”). AFFIRMED.

4 Case: 12-12486 Date Filed: 08/23/2012 Page: 4 of 4