Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cicero Fred JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-12-11
Citations: 257 F. App'x 809
Docket Number: No. 06-11197
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cicero Fred JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 257
Pages: 809–809

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cicero Fred JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-11197
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Dec. 11, 2007.
Suzanna 0. Etessam, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Cicero Fred Jackson, Fort Worth, TX, pro se.
Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Cicero Fred Jackson, federal prisoner # 26054-177, pleaded guilty to distribution of cocaine base. Jackson now appeals the district court's denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion. This court reviews a district court's refusal to lower a defendant's sentence under § 3582(c)(2) for abuse of discretion. United States v. Shaw, 30 F.3d 26, 28 (5th Cir.1994).
Jackson's contention that his sentence is subject to modification in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), is without merit. Section 3582(c)(2) is inapplicable because Booker did not involve a retroactive amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines by the Sentencing Commission. See Shaw, 30 F.3d at 28; § 3582(c)(2).
Jackson's appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983). We caution Jackson that further frivolous filings may result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal, monetary penalties, and restrictions on his ability to file appeals in this court and actions in any court subject to this court's jurisdiction.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.