United States v. Castorena , 169 F. App'x 181 ( 2006 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 22, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-10996
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSE ANGEL CASTORENA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:92-CR-155-Y
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Angel Castorena, federal prisoner #23875-077, appeals
the denial of his motion for reduction of sentence under 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). He argues that he is entitled to a reduced
sentence under Amendment 505 to the Sentencing Guidelines and the
Supreme Court’s decisions in Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct.
2531 (2004), and United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 04-10996
-2-
A district court exercises sound discretion in determining
whether to grant a 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion, and we review
its decision for abuse of discretion only. United States v.
Gonzalez-Balderas, 105 F.3d 981, 982 (5th Cir. 1997). The
district court did not abuse its discretion in denying
Castorena’s motion. This court’s previous opinion denying relief
under § 3582(c)(2) with respect to Douglas’s Amendment 505 claim
is the law of the case. See United States v. Becerra, 155 F.3d
740, 752 (5th Cir. 1998). Castorena’s Blakely and Booker claims
are not cognizable in the context of a 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
motion because neither case is based on a retroactive amendment
to the Guidelines. See United States v. Shaw, 30 F.3d 26, 29
(5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.