1

The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the

District of South Dakota, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-1662

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee. *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the 

* Western District of Missouri.

Carlos Garcia, *

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 11, 2010

 Filed: July 1, 2010 

___________

Before SMITH, COLLOTON, Circuit Judges, and KORNMANN,1

 District Judge.

___________

KORNMANN, District Judge.

I. Introduction.

Carlos Garcia pleaded guilty to distribution of cocaine and was sentenced on

June 3, 2005. The presentence investigation report attributed a drug quantity of 100

to 150 grams of cocaine to Garcia, resulting in a base offense level of Level 32. His

total offense level was level 31 and, with a criminal history category of V, his
2

The Honorable Ortrie D. Smith, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

-2-

guideline range was 168 - 210 months. He was sentenced to 168 months custody, the

lowest end of the guideline range.

In November 2007, the Sentencing Commission amended Guidelines § 2D1.1

to reduce the base offense levels for offenses involving crack cocaine (cocaine base).

See Amendment 706. Effective March 3, 2008, the Sentencing Commission

determined that Amendment 706 may be applied retroactively to afford sentencing

relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). See Amendment 713, amending the list of

covered amendments set forth in § 1B1.10(c).

The new base offense level for 100 to 150 grams of cocaine became level 30.

Garcia moved for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(2). The

district court2

 granted the motion, reducing Garcia’s sentence to 140 months, the

lowest end of the reduced guideline range of 140 to 175 months. 

Garcia asked the District Court to apply United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220,

264, 125 S.Ct. 738, 767, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), treat the Guidelines as advisory

only, and impose a sentence below the guideline range. The district court, relying

upon the Eighth Circuit’s decision in United States v. Starks, 551 F.3d 839 (8th Cir.

2009), held that it lacked authority to sentence below the amended guideline range.

II. Discussion.

Garcia contends on appeal that the district court erred in applying the

sentencing guidelines as mandatory upon resentencing. Garcia’s argument is

foreclosed by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon v. United States,
-3-

 ___ U.S. ___, No. 09-6338, 2010 WL 2400109, at *6 (June 17, 2010), holding that

a court acting under section 3582(c)(2) to reduce a crack cocaine sentence is

foreclosed from reducing the sentence to a term that is less than the minimum of the

amended guideline range unless the original sentence was below the minimum

guideline range. In other words, section 3582(c)(2) permits only a sentence reduction,

not a resentencing. Dillon confirms that Starks was “good law.”

As in the Dillon case, Garcia was sentenced prior to Booker when the district

court’s authority to sentence a defendant below the guidelines range was limited to

departures set forth in USSG Chapter 5K. Following Booker, district courts imposing

an original sentence are authorized to vary from the guidelines range based upon the

factors set forth in § 3553(a). United States v. Shannon, 414 F.3d 921, 923 (8th Cir.

2005). The Supreme Court has declined in Dillon to extend Booker’s reach to

resentencings authorized by § 3582(c)(2).

III. Conclusion.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

______________________________