Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raul CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-12-15
Citations: 624 F. App'x 587
Docket Number: No. 15-10102
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raul CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 624
Pages: 587–588

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raul CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10102.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 9, 2015.
Filed Dec. 15, 2015.
Kathleen Anne Servatius, Assistant U.S., D.O.J.-USAO, Fresno, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Raul Chavez, Oakdale, LA, pro se.
Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Raul Chavez appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Chavez contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir.2009). Contrary to Chavez's contention, Amendment 782 did not lower his offense level calculation under U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(c). See U.S.S.G. app. C, amend. 782 (Supp. 2014). Thus, the district court lacked authority to reduce his sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); Lerdear, 574 F.3d at 674.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.