United States v. Henry Avila
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry AVILA, Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
Mr. Avila appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for sentencing range reduction.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ; 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2). We affirm.
The Sentencing Guidelines now permit a three-level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility in certain circum *768 stances.
See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b) (Nov. 1, 1992) & app. C, amend. 459 (eff. Nov. 1, 1992). Mr. Avila contends that, under the rule of lenity and 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2), the district court should reduce his sentence one level, because at the time he was sentenced, only a two-level downward adjustment was in effect.
Section 3582(c)(2) empowers a district court to reduce a term of imprisonment when a sentencing range has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. However, such power is tethered to the factors contained in § 3553(a), including any pertinent policy statement of the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a)(5). The policy statements accompanying U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 provide that if an amendment is not listed as covered, a reduction in sentence based on the amendment would not be consistent with the policy statement. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a), p.s. Amendment 459, on which Mr. Avila relies, is not covered by the policy statement.
See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(d), p.s. Thus, the amendment to § 3E1.1 cannot be applied retroactively and it may not serve as a basis on which to reduce his sentence.
See United States v. Rodriguez, 989 F.2d 583, 587 (2d Cir.1993).
AFFIRMED.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(holding amendment to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 not retroactive so not basis for sentence reduction)
-
(“The policy statements accompanying USSG § 1B1.10 provide that if an amendment is not listed as covered, a reduction of sentence based on the amendment would not be consistent with the policy statement.”)
Cited by 33 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.