United States v. Eladio Bouza , 548 F. App'x 454 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            DEC 09 2013
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 12-50238
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:90-cr-00856-JAH
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    ELADIO SOTO BOUZA, a.k.a. Fantoma,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of California
    John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted November 19, 2013**
    Before:        CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    Eladio Soto Bouza appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his
    
    18 U.S.C. § 3582
    (c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction
    under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    . We review de novo whether the district court had
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    authority to modify a defendant’s sentence under section 3582(c)(2), see United
    States v. Austin, 
    676 F.3d 924
    , 926 (9th Cir. 2012), and we affirm.
    Bouza contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction because the
    government failed to comply with the requirements of 
    21 U.S.C. § 851
     at his
    original sentencing. This contention does not support relief under section
    3582(c)(2). See Dillon v. United States, 
    130 S. Ct. 2683
    , 2691 (2010) (section
    3582(c)(2) authorizes “only a limited adjustment to an otherwise final sentence and
    not a plenary resentencing proceeding”). Bouza is not entitled to relief under
    section 3582(c)(2) because he was sentenced in 1991 to a life term, the statutory
    mandatory minimum under 
    21 U.S.C. § 841
    (b)(1)(A) (1991), and not based on a
    Guidelines range that was subsequently lowered. See 
    18 U.S.C. § 3582
    (c)(2); see
    also United States v. Augustine, 
    712 F.3d 1290
    , 1295 (9th Cir. 2013) (the Fair
    Sentencing Act’s new mandatory minimums do not apply to defendants who were
    sentenced before the Act’s effective date).
    AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-50238

Citation Numbers: 548 F. App'x 454

Judges: Canby, Thomas, Trott

Filed Date: 12/9/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/31/2023