P u r s u a n t t o F ifth C ir c u it R u le 4 7 .5 , th e c o u r t h a s d e te r m in e dth a t t h is * opi n i on shou l d n otbe pu bl i shedan d i s not preceden texcep t u n d er th e li m i t ed c i r c um st ance s se tf

or t h i n F if

t h C i r c ui tR ul e 4 7. 5. 4. 

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 11180 Su m m ar y Cal 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. HENRYGE NE LAF F OON, 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 th e N ort h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 4: 04- C R - 128- 1 B ef ore W IE N E R , ST E W A R T , an d E L R O D , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IAM: * H e nr y G e ne Laf

f o o n, fe de r alpr i s o ne r#3 20 74 - 17 7, a ppe al s f o l l o w i ng t he d i stri ct co u rt’ s d en i a lof h i s m oti on f or m od ifica ti on of h i s sen ten ce p u rsu a n t t o 18 U . S. C. § 3 5 8 2 (c ) ( 2 ) whe r e i n hea r g ue dt ha tt heSe nt e nc i ngGui d e l i ne s h ad been am en dedretroact ivel y an d that such a m e n dm en tres u l t ed i n a l ow ered sentenci n g ran ge f

or hi s of

fen se. Th e G overnm en tm oves f or s u m m ary United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I LE D November

4, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 11180

2 a f f i r ma n c e o rd i s mi s s a lo f t h e a p p e a l , o r , a l t e r n a t iv e ly , f o ra n e x t e n s i o n o f

t i me to file ab r ie f. 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 w he r e t he s e nt e nc i ng r ang e i s l at e rl o w e r e d b y t he Sen t en c i ng C om m i ssi on , “if

such a reducti on i s c on si st en tw i t h t h e pol i cy st atem en t s i ssued b y th e S en ten ci n g C om m i ssion . ” Uni t e d St at e sv . G o nzalez - Bal de ras , 105 F. 3d 981 , 982 ( 5th C i r. 199 7) . Th e di st ri ctcourt ’ s deci si on w h et h er t o reduce a s e nt e nc e i s r e vi e w e d f o ran abus e of

di s c r e t i o n; t he c o ur t ’ s i nt e r pr e t at i o n o f t he G u id e lin e s is re v ie w e dd e n o v o . Un itedS ta tes v . D o u b lin , 57 2 F . 3 d23 5 , 23 7 ( 5 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ), pet i t i on f

or c ert . f

i led(U .S . S e p t. 2 1 , 2 0 0 9 ) (N o . 0 9 -6 6 5 7 ). A m en d m e nt 5 9 9 b e c a m e e f fe c t iv e i n 2 0 0 0 , f

iv e y e a r s b e f

o r e La f f o on w as s e n te n c e d . S eeU . S . S . G . , app . C , A m en dm en t599 . Th e p re se n te n ce r eport ref l ect ed ap pl i cat i on of A m en dm en t599 in d et erm i n i n g h i s s en t en ci n g ran ge, w h i ch w as a dop t ed by t h e d i st ri ctcou rt . B ecau se L af f oon ’ s § 358 2(c) ( 2) m ot i on w as no tb as e d o n as e nt e nc i n g ra nget hatw as “ s ubs e que nt ly”l o w e r e d b y t he Se nt e nc i ng Com m i s s i o n, t he di s t r i c tc o ur td i d n ote r ri n de nyi ng t he m o t i o n. The G o ve r nm e nt ’ s m o t i o n f o rs um m ary af

f i r m anc e i s G RA N TE D . The al t er nat ive m ot i on f

oran ex t ens i on o f

ti m e i s D E N I E D as unn ec es sa r y. AF F I RMED.