Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d an d 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- 20110 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. I S RAEL ES PE RI CUETA , 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 S ou t h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 4: 90- C R
- 428- 12 B ef ore D AV IS, SM ITH , an d D E N N IS, C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R I A M: * Is raelE speri cueta, federalpri soner # 591 64-079, w as convi ct ed i n a j u ry tri a lf or co n sp ir a c y to p oss ess w i th i n ten t t o d i strib u te coca i n e, con sp i ra cyto l au n d e r m on ey, an d aidi n g an d ab et t i n g m on ey l au n deri n g. H e rec eived concu rrent t erm s of

i m pri sonm en tof

360 m on t h s, 60 m on t h s, an d 24 0 m on t h s, respect ivel y, f

or each coun t . H i s 360
- m on t h sentence sub sequ en t l y w as redu ced to 26 2 m on th s of i m p ri son m en t. United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Ma rc h 22, 2010 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk Case: 08-20110 Document: 00511058327 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/22/2010N o. 08- 20110

2 E spe r i c uet a appea l s t he di st r i c tc our t ’ s deni al of hi s 18 U . S. C . § 3582(c ) ( 2) m o t i o n f

o ra r e duc t i o n o f

s e nt e nc e . H e a r gue s t hat“ [ g] ive n t he r e c e nt cl ari f i cat i on of

U . S . Sen t en ci n g G u i del i n es, ” hi s s en t en ce s h ou l d be redu ced be c aus e und e rU . S. S. G . § 4A1. 2(c ) ( 1) , apr i o rc o nvi c t i o n f o ra n i ns uf

f i c i e ntf unds check sh ou l d n otha ve been used t o i n crease h i s cri m i n alh i st ory sc ore by t h ree poi n t s. H e speci f

i es t h at am en dm en t 709 t o t h e S en t en ci n g G u i del i n es c l ari f i ed t h i s i s s u e . E s p e r i c u e t a a l s o mo v e s t h i s c o u r tf o rl e a v e t o p r o c e e di n f o r ma p a u p eris ( IF P ) on a p p ea l . T o ob tain l ea ve to pro cee dIF P on ap p ea l , E sp ericu eta m u stshow t h at he i s a pau per an d that h e w i l l present a n on f rivol ou s i ssue f

or a p p e a l. S ee Carson v. Pol ley, 6 8 9 F .2d 5 6 2 , 5 8 6 (5t h C ir. 1 9 8 2 ). Be c a u s e a m e n d m e n t s t o t h e Gu i d e l i n e s c a n n o t b e c o n s i d e r e d i n a § 358 2( c) ( 2) m o tion un l ess t h ey are l i st ed i n U . S . S . G . § 1B 1. 10(c ) an d becau se am e ndm e nt7 09 i s no tl i s t e d i n § 1 B1. 10 (c ) , Esp e r i c ue t a has no tsho w n t hathe is e n tit le dto a re d u c tio n in h is s e n te n c e . S ee Un itedS ta tes v. D ra th , 89 F. 3d 2 1 6 , 2 1 7 -18 (5th C i r. 1 9 9 6 ). A ccord i n gly, E sp ericu eta h a s fa i l ed to de m on strate th a t t h e d is tr ic t c o u r t a b u s e dits d i s c r e tio n ind e n y in gh im are d u c tio n o f h is s e n te n c e p u r s u a n t to § 3 5 8 2 (c )(2 ). Se eUni t e d St at e s v . Shaw , 30 F. 3d 26, 28- 29 (5 th C ir . 1 9 9 4 ). As Es pe r i c ue t a has no ts ho w n t hathi s a ppe alpr e s e nt s ano nf r ivo l o us is s u e , h is r e q u e s t fo r le a v e to p r o c e e dIF P is D E N IE D . Se eCars o n, 689 F. 2d at 5 8 6 . B eca u se his a p p ea l i s frivo l ou s, i t i s D IS M IS S E D . S ee5 T H C IR . R . 42. 2. Case: 08-20110 Document: 00511058327 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/22/2010