Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darryl W. TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-10-21
Citations: 112 F. App'x 974
Docket Number: No. 04-30378
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darryl W. TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 112
Pages: 974–976

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darryl W. TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-30378.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Oct. 21, 2004.
Richard B. Launey, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Robert William Piedrahita, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Middle District of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Darryl W. Taylor, # 02975-095, Federal Medical Center Houston Unit, Fort Worth, TX, pro se.
Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Darryl W. Taylor, federal prisoner # 02975-095, seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") to appeal the district court's denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence based on retroactive Amendment 591 to the sentencing guidelines. Taylor also moves for a certificate of appealability ("COA") arising out of the district court's denial of his Fed.R.Crim.P. 59(e) motion as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Because Taylor devotes his argument to the denial of his § 3582(c)(2) motion and does not challenge the denial of his post-judgment motion, COA is DENIED as unnecessary.
By filing the IFP motion, Taylor is challenging the district court's certification decision that his appeal was not taken in good faith because it is frivolous. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.1997); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Fed. R.App. P. 24(a)(5). However, Taylor has not demonstrated any nonfrivolous ground for appeal.
In 1998, Taylor pleaded guilty to distributing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and he was sentenced based on the PSR's determination that the offense involved 336.8 grams of cocaine base. Taylor argues that Amendment 591 dictates that he must be resentenced because no quantity of drugs was specified in the indictment. He is mistaken. Amendment 591 applies to the determination of the - appropriate Chapter Two offense guideline section, and Taylor was properly sentenced under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, the appropriate offense guideline section for convictions under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Amendment 591 is irrelevant to the determination of base (or specific) offense levels within the applicable offense guideline section or to any consideration of relevant conduct. Taylor's motion to proceed IFP is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n. 24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Taylor that further frivolous filings will subject him to sanctions.
COA DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.