United States v. Manthei ( 2001 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-10788
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RAMONA JOHNSTON MANTHEI,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:88-CR-189-E
__________________________________________
November 6, 2001
Before POLITZ, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ramona Johnston Manthei appeals the district court’s denial of her motion to
reduce sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Manthei contends that the trial court
abused its discretion in holding that Amendment 484 was inapplicable to her
sentence.
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
Section 3582(c)(2) permits a district court to reduce a term of imprisonment
when it is based upon a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by an
amendment to the Guidelines, if the reduction is consistent with the policy
statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.1 A § 3582(c)(2) motion applies
only to those guideline amendments that operate retroactively as listed in the policy
statement to U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c).2 Reduction under § 3582(c)(2) is discretionary,
and this court reviews a district court’s refusal to lower a defendant’s sentence for
abuse of discretion.3 A district court’s factual findings made in a § 3582(c)(2)
proceeding, however, are reviewed for clear error.4
In calculating Manthei’s sentence, the record reveals that the trial court
considered not only the amphetamine she distributed to an undercover agent, but
also the capacity of the laboratory operated by her.5 Consistent with Amendment
484 to the sentencing guidelines, no inadmissible drug waste product was
considered by the court in its calculation.6
Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to apply
Amendment 484 to Manthei’s sentence. AFFIRMED.
1
United States v. Gonzalez-Balderas, 105 F.3d 981 (5th Cir. 1997).
2
United States v. Miller, 903 F.2d 341 (5th Cir. 1990).
3
United States v. Shaw, 30 F.3d 26 (5th Cir. 1994).
4
United States v. Mimms, 43 F.3d 217 (5th Cir. 1995).
5
United States v. Allison, 63 F.3d 350 (5th Cir. 1995).
6
Id.; United States v. Manthei, 913 F.2d 1130 (5th Cir. 1990).
2