Court Opinion

ID: 4162850
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-04-24 21:05:55.170909+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:35.886723
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        APR 24 2017
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 16-50162

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00155-JFW

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
JESSE EDGARDO HERRERA, a.k.a.
Harald Herrera, a.k.a. Harold Herrera, a.k.a.
Herald Herrera, a.k.a. Jesse B. Herrera,
a.k.a. Jesse Edgar Herrera, a.k.a. Jessie
Herrera,

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Central District of California
                    John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted April 11, 2017**

Before:      GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

      Jesse Edgardo Herrera 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

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

      Herrera’s plea agreement provided that, if he received the benefit of then-

pending Amendment 782 at sentencing, he waived any right to file a later motion

for a sentence reduction under that amendment. Contrary to Herrera’s contention,

the record reflects that the sentencing court granted him the benefit of Amendment

782 by way of a two-level downward variance. Accordingly, the district court

correctly concluded that Herrera had waived the right to pursue a further reduction.

      AFFIRMED.

                                         2                                   16-50162