United States v. Douglas Jackson , 667 F. App'x 869 ( 2016 )

Case: 16-10033 Document: 00513629406 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2016
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 16-10033 FILED
Summary Calendar August 9, 2016
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
DOUGLAS JACKSON,
Defendant - Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:06-CR-10-3
Before BARKSDALE, GRAVES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Douglas Jackson, federal prisoner # 34028-177, proceeding pro se on appeal
from the denial of his motion for a sentence reduction, pleaded guilty, with a
written plea agreement, to possession, with intent to distribute, 500 grams or
more of a mixture containing a detectable amount of cocaine, in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). Although Jackson was determined to be a career
offender, the court calculated his sentencing range based on his offense level,
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir.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: 16-10033 Document: 00513629406 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/09/2016
No. 16-10033
under Guideline § 2D1.1, because it was higher than the career-offender offense
level, under Guideline § 4B1.1. Prior to the motion at issue, Jackson successfully
moved to reduce his sentence, lowering his base offense level to 34, under § 2D1.1,
the same as his career-offender offense level, under § 4B1.1.
The district court denied the instant 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion pursuant
to Amendment 782, concluding Jackson was ineligible for the reduction. In
challenging that denial and his motion for reconsideration, Jackson asserts he is
eligible for a sentence reduction based on that amendment.
The court’s authority to reduce a sentence pursuant to § 3582(c)(2) is
reviewed de novo. United States v. Jones, 596 F.3d 273, 276 (5th Cir. 2010).
Section 3582(c)(2) allows a district court to reduce a defendant’s sentence if he was
sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that
subsequently was lowered by an amendment to the advisory Guidelines. United
States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 237 (5th Cir. 2009). Amendment 782, which is
retroactive, reduced the base-offense levels for crack-cocaine offenses. See
U.S.S.G., Supp. to App. C., Amends. 782, 788.
Nevertheless, that Jackson’s offense level has been reduced, alone, does not
entitle him to a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Banks,
770 F.3d 346, 349 (5th Cir. 2014). Although Amendment 782 would reduce
Jackson’s § 2D1.1 offense level, the court’s determining it would use Jackson’s
career-offender offense level of 34, under § 4B1.1(b), because it is higher than that
produced by § 2D1.1 following the amendment, was proper. Id. at 348–49.
Jackson’s sentencing range remains unchanged by the amendment; therefore, the
court correctly determined it lacked authority under § 3582(c)(2) to lower his
sentence. See id.
AFFIRMED.
2