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 circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 50590 Su m m ar yC al endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. O L V E R A D A L I S U A Z O

- IR IA S , al so kn ow n as E ri ck H erna n M art i n ez 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 or t h e W est ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SDC N o . 1 : 0 6 - CR- 5 0 - ALL B e fo r e J O L L Y , B E N AV ID E S , a n dH AY N E S , C ir c u it J u d g e s . P E R C U R IA M: * In 20 0 6 , O lve r A d a l i S u a zo -I ri a s (Su a zo ) p l ea d ed gu i l ty to p oss ess i on w i th t h e intent t o d i st ribu t e cocai n e p ow der an d f ive gram s or m ore of coc ai n e base. H e w as sentenced to t h e st atutor y m ini m u m sentence of 60 m on t h s of i m pri so nm ent . H e a ppeal s t he di st r i c tcour t ’ s deni alof hi s 18 U . S. C . § 3582(c ) ( 2) m ot i on f

or a r edu ct ion o f s en t en ce, w h i ch w as basedon the U n i t ed S t ates S en t en ci n g C om m i ssi o n ’ s am en dm en t s t o t h e Sen t en ci n g G u i del i n es’ s base United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 17, 2 009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 50590

2 of fen se l evel s f

or c rack cocai n e. W e revi ew t h e den i al of a § 358 2(c) ( 2) m ot i on f or a b u s e o f d is c r e tio n . Uni t e d St at e s v . Shaw , 3 0 F .3d 2 6 , 2 8 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 4 ). C i t i ng Un i t ed S t ate s v. B ooker , 5 43 U . S . 2 20 ( 20 05 ) , a nd Ki m brough v. Un i t ed S t ate s , 552 U . S . 85 ( 2 0 07), Su azo argu es t h at t h e di st ri ctcourtabu sed i t s di scr et i on i n den yi n g h i s m ot i on t o red u ce h i s s en t en ce because t h e di st ri ct c our ter r oneo usly be l i eve d its a u t hor i t y t o r educ e hi s se nt enc e w as l i m i t ed by U . S . S . G . § 1B 1. 10. Th e G overnm en th as fil ed a m ot i on f or s u m m ary af

f i rm an ce, o r, a lter n a tiv e ly, fora n ex te n sio n of tim e w ith inw h ich to file ab rie f. Th e di st r i c tc our tc oul d nothave i m pos ed a gui del i nes se nt enc e t hatw as lo w e rth a n th e s ta tu to r i l ym a n d a te dm in im u m p e n a lty . SeeUni t e d S t at e s v. Harper , 5 2 7 F .3 d3 9 6 , 4 1 1 (5 th C ir .), cer t . den i ed , 1 2 9 S . C t. 2 1 2 (2 0 0 8 ); Un i t ed S t ate s v. G om ez- Herrera , 5 2 3 F .3 d5 5 4 , 5 5 9 ( 5 th C ir .), cer t . den i ed , 129 S. C t . 624 (20 0 8 ). A c c or di ngl y, Su azo has not sho w n t hat t he di st r i c t c our t abuse d i ts d is c r e tio n in d e n y in gh is m o tio n fo rare d u c tio n o f h is s e n te n c e . Se eShaw , 30 F. 3d at28. The G o ve r nm e nt ’ s m o t i o n f o rs um m ar y af

f i r m ance i s G RA N TE D , t he G ove r nm ent ’ s al t er n a tive m ot i on f oran ex t ens i on o f

t i m e i s D I SM I SS E D as mo o t , a n dt h e j u d g me n to f t h e d i s t r i c tc o u r ti s A F F I RMED.