United States v. Felipe Barrientos
This text of 697 F. App'x 367 (United States v. Felipe Barrientos) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In 2012, Felipe Barrientos pleaded guilty to possessing, with intent to distribute, more than 100 kilograms of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841. He received an enhanced statutory-minimum sentence of 120 months’ imprisonment.
Proceeding pro se, Barrientos appeals the denial of his motion, under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), for a sentence reduction based on Sentencing Guidelines Amendment 782. Although acknowledging he received the statutory minimum, Barrientos contends he is eligible for. a reduction, because, inter alia, the Guidelines are no longer mandatory.
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), a district court has discretion to modify a sentence “based on a [Guidelines] range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission”. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). But, Barrientos’ sentence was not “based on” the Guidelines; and the court lacked authority to reduce his sentence below the 10-year minimum sentence required by statute. United States v. Carter, 595 F.3d 575, 578-81 (5th Cir. 2010); 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(vii). Moreover, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) does not permit a full resentencing, but merely permits a sentence reduction under limited circumstances specified by the Sentencing Commission. Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 825-26, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010); United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 238 (5th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
697 F. App'x 367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-felipe-barrientos-ca5-2017.