United States v. Michael Rodgers

476 F. App'x 95

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael Rodgers appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) sentence-reduction motion based on Amendment 750 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm, as Rodgers’s applicable Guidelines range was not lowered by the amendment, and he has provided no other ground warranting reversal. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, comment. (n.l(A)) (eligibility for consideration under § 3582(c)(2) is triggered only by amendment that lowers applicable Guidelines range); United States v. Tolliver, 570 F.3d 1062, 1066-67 (8th Cir.2009) (where applicable Guidelines range was not lowered by amendment, district court lacked authority to reduce sentence).

The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted, subject to counsel informing appellant about procedures for seeking rehearing or filing a petition for certiorari.

1 . The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.