Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circumstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 30596 Su m m ar yC al endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t if f

- A pp el l ee v. M A R C E L L U S Q U E C H E Z R E Y N O L D S , al so kn ow n as Tit t ym oe, D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f ort he W es t er n D i st r i c tof Loui si ana U SD C N o. 2: 04- C R
- 20145- 9 B ef ore JO L LY , W IE N E R , an d E L R O D , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IAM: * M ar c ell us Q uec hez R eynol ds, now fede r alpr i so ner# 38 9 6 0- 179, has appeal ed the deni alof hi s m ot i ons unde r 1 8 U . S . C . § 3582(c ) ( 2) r eques t i ng a r e duc t i o n o f

hi s s e nt e nc e i n li ghto f r e c e nta m e ndm e nt s t o t he Se n t en ci ng G ui de l i ne s pe r t ai ni ng t o c o c ai ne ba s e o f fe ns e s . Se c t i o n 35 82 (c ) ( 2) perm i t s t he di s c r e t i o nary m o dif

i c at i o n o f

adef e nda nt ’ s se nt e nc e i n c e r t ai n c as e s w he r e t he s e nt en ci n g ran ge h as been subsequ en t ly l ow ered by the Se nt e nc ing Com m i s s i o n. S eeUn itedS ta tes v. D o u b lin , 5 7 2 F .3 d2 3 5 , 2 3 7 (5 th C ir .), cer t . den i ed , 13 0 S . C t. United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I LE D May 18, 2010 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk Case: 09-30596 Document: 00511114754 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2010N o. 09- 30596

2 51 7 ( 200 9) . A m e ndm e nt7 06 t o t he Se nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s m o dif i e d the gu i d eli n e ra n ge s ap p l i ca b l e to coca i n e b a se o ff en ses to red u ce th e d i sp a ri ty b e t we e n c o c a i n e b a s e a n dp o wd e rc o c a i n e s e n t e n c e s . U . S . S . G. Su p p . t o Ap p . C, A m e n d . 7 0 6 ; D o u b lin , 5 7 2 F .3 da t 2 3 6 . S e c t io n 3 5 8 2 (c )( 2 ) p e r m it s th e d is c r e t io n a r ym o d if ic a t io n o f a d e fe n d a n t ’s s e nt e nc e o nly w he r et he de fe nda nt ’ s s e nt e nc i ng r ang e i s a c t ually l o w e r e d b y t he S e n te n c in gC o m m is s io n . S ee § 3 5 8 2 (c )(2 ). B e c a u s e R e y n o ld s w a s a c c o u n ta b le fo rm o r e th a n 4 .5 k ilo g r a m s o f c o c a in e b a s e , A m e n d m e n t 7 0 6 d idn o t c h a n g e h is g u id e lin e s s e n te n c e ra n g e . S ee A m end. 706.

“A § 3 58 2(c ) ( 2) m o t i o n i s notas e c o nd o ppo r t unit y t o pr e s e ntm i t i ga t i ng fac t o r s t o t he s e nt e nc i ng j udg e , no r i s i t a c hall e nge t o t he ap pr o pr i at e ne s s o f t he origina lsen ten ce.” Un i t ed S t ate s v. W h i t ebi rd , 55 F . 3d100 7 , 1 011 ( 5th C i r. 1 9 9 5 ); seealso U . S. S. G . § 1B 1. 10, p. s. Th us, R eynol ds w as notent i t l ed t o have th e d is tr ic t c o u r t r e c a lc u la te h is b a s e o ffe n s e le v e l. B e c a u s e R e y n o ld s is in e lig ib le fo rre lie f, th e d is tr ic t c o u r t ’s o r d e ris A F F IR M E D . R eyn ol ds’ s r equ esti n hi s bri ef f or app oi n t m e n t o f cou n self or p r e s e n t a t i o n o f

o r a la r g u me n ti s DE NI ED . Case: 09-30596 Document: 00511114754 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/18/2010