Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Basilio ANGULO-LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-02-13
Citations: 55 F. App'x 863
Docket Number: No. 02-30171; D.C. No. CR-90-00323-BJR
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Basilio ANGULO-LOPEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 55
Pages: 863–864

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Basilio ANGULO-LOPEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 02-30171.
D.C. No. CR-90-00323-BJR.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 10, 2003.
Decided Feb. 13, 2003.
Before LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, we deny An-gulo-Lopez’s motion for appointment of counsel for purposes of oral argument.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Basilio Angulo-Lopez appeals pro se the district court's order denying his motion to modify his sentence on the basis of his deteriorating health. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo questions of law. United States v. Stephens, 237 F.3d 1031, 1033 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm because the district court lacked jurisdiction to reduce the sentence imposed after Angulo-Lopez's 1991 jury conviction. See e.g., United States v. Hetrick, 644 F.2d 752, 756 (9th Cir.1980) (holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction over untimely motion to reduce sentence).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.