United States v. Juan Reyes, Jr. , 672 F. App'x 398 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 16-10501      Document: 00513808234         Page: 1    Date Filed: 12/21/2016
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 16-10501                                FILED
    Summary Calendar                      December 21, 2016
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    JUAN ANTHONY REYES, JR.,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 5:05-CR-83-2
    Before JONES, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Juan Anthony Reyes, Jr., federal prisoner # 31910-177, seeks our
    authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal of the district
    court’s denial of his motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) to reduce his sentence
    for distribution of methamphetamine and aiding and abetting. See 21 U.S.C.
    § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B); 18 U.S.C. § 2. He challenges the district court’s denial of
    IFP status and the district court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 16-10501   Document: 00513808234     Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/21/2016
    No. 16-10501
    good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 
    117 F.3d 197
    , 202 (5th Cir. 1997). An appeal
    is frivolous if it “lacks an arguable basis in law or fact.” Taylor v. Johnson, 
    257 F.3d 470
    , 472 (5th Cir. 2001).
    Contrary to Reyes’s argument, a district court is not required to reduce
    a sentence under § 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Evans, 
    587 F.3d 667
    , 672-
    73 (5th Cir. 2009). Also, contrary to what Reyes contends, this court may
    assume that the district court duly considered the § 3553(a) factors, as the
    court “was presented with argument concerning the § 3553(a) factors.” 
    Id. at 673.
        And because the record demonstrates that the district court duly
    considered Reyes’s motion as a whole and explicitly or implicitly considered the
    § 3553(a) factors, “the district court did not abuse its discretion.” United States
    v. Whitebird, 
    55 F.3d 1007
    , 1010 (5th Cir. 1995).
    Reyes fails to present a nonfrivolous argument for overturning the
    district court’s certification decision, which is intertwined with the merits of
    the case. See 
    Baugh, 117 F.3d at 302
    . Accordingly, his IFP motion is DENIED,
    and we sua sponte DISMISS his appeal as frivolous. See 
    Taylor, 257 F.3d at 472
    ; 
    Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202
    ; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2; FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(3).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-10501

Citation Numbers: 672 F. App'x 398

Filed Date: 12/21/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023