[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 2- 11 20 1 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 8 :0 7- cr-0 02 55 -J DW -TBM- 3
UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us W ILLINGTON AL VAREZ-MOSQUERA, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Au gu st27 , 20 12 ) Befo re TJ OFLAT, MARCUS an d P RYOR, Ci rcu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:

Case: 12-11201 Date Filed: 08/27/2012 Page: 1 of 3On J ul y 20 , 20 07 , W il li ng to n Al va rez- Mo sque ra p le d g ui lt y to co ns pi racy to po ss es s wi th in te ntto di st rib ut e fi ve or m or e k il og ram s o f co cai ne whi le on bo ard a v es se l s ub

ject t o t he juri sd ic ti on of t he Uni te d S ta te s, i n v io la ti on of 4 6 U.S.C. §§ 70 50 3( a) an d 7 05 06 (a) a nd(b) , andon Nov em be r 20 , 20 07 , th e Dis tri ctCo urt se nt en cedhi m

to a pr is on term

of 1 35 m on th s, atth e lo w endof t he Gui de li ne s se nt en ci ng ran ge of 1 35 to 16 8 m on th s. 1 On J anua ry

25 , 20 12 , Alv arez -Mo sque ra, p ro ceed in g pr o s e , fil eda m ot io n wit h t he Dis tri ctCo urt s tyledMOTION UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3 58 2( c)(2 ) AND U.S. SENTENCING GU IDELINE§ 1 B1 .10 (c) FOR REDUCTION OF SENTENCE BASED ONPOST CONVICTION REHABILITATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.S.G. § 36 61 . The b od y of the m ot io n s ta te d t ha t h e was se ek in g asen te nc e reduc ti on “pu rs ua ntto th e Due Pro ces s C laus e o f th e Fi fth Am en dm en t an d s ta tu te [18 U.S.C.] § 3 66 1.” The Di stric t Co urt d en ie d t he m ot io n i n awrit te n o rd er co nt ai ni ng th is st at em en t: The co urt ha s n o ju ris di ct io n t o m od ify a sen te nc e o th er than (1 ) up on a m ot io n of th e Dir ect orof t he Bu reauof P ris on s p ur su an t t o 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 82 (c), t o t he ex te ntex pr es sl y pe rm it te d b y

st atut e, or(2) up on a m ot io n b y

th e Gov ern m en t p ur su an t t o R ul e 3 5 o f th e Fed eral Ru le s of Cri m in al Pro cedur e. Defen da ntpre se nt s n o b as is un de r th es e pr ov is io ns supp orti ng a m od ifi cat io n o f hi s t erm of i m pr is on m en t.
At sentenc ing, he was he ld acc ountable for around 1394 kilograms of c ocaine , which 1 yielded a total of

fenselevel of 33. 2 Case: 12-11201 Date Filed: 08/27/2012 Page: 2 of 3Alv arez -Mo sque ra n ow ap pe al s t he co urt’s o rd er, cl ai m in g t ha t the co urt co ul d

ha ve reduc edhi s s en te nc e b as edon hi s p os t-s en te nc in g re habi li ta ti on effo rts an d th e rec en t av ai labi li ty of a fas t-t rackpro gr am withi n t he Mi dd le Dis tri ctof Fl or id a. As the Dis tri ctCo urt s ta te d, i t h as au th or it y to reduc e a d efen da nt ’s se nt en ce u nd er 2 8 U.S.C. § 35 82 (c)( 2) on m ot io n b y th e Dir ect orof t he Bu reauof Pri so ns or o n m ot io n b y

th e Gov ern m en t und er Fe de ral Ru le of C riminal Pro cedur e 3 5( b) (2 ). Neit he r is pre se nthe re. The co urt m ay als o re du ce a s en te nc e un de r §3 58 2( c)(2 ) whe n t he Sen te nc in g C omm is si on ha s l owe redth e Gui de li ne s se nt en ci ng ran ge un de r whi ch th e d efen da ntwas s en te nc ed . Thatha s n otsh own to be th e cas e h ere. Th e Dis tri ctCo urt’s o rd er i s ac co rd in gl y AFFIR MED.

3 Case: 12-11201 Date Filed: 08/27/2012 Page: 3 of 3