United States v. Oswaldo Zuniga-Sanchez

678 F. App'x 602

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: February 27, 2017
• Docket: 16-30028
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Oswaldo Zuniga-Sanchez appeals pro se from the district court’s order granting in part Zuniga-Sanchez’s motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

The district court reduced Zuniga-San-chez’s sentence to 120 months, which reflects the mandatory minimum for his offense. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A). Zuniga-Sanchez contends that he is entitled to a further reduction. We review de novo a district court’s refusal to depart below the mandatory minimum. See United States v. Sykes, 658 F.3d 1140, 1144 (9th Cir. 2011). Because the mandatory minimum applies in section 3582(c)(2) proceedings, the distinct court correctly concluded that it could not reduce Zuniga-Sanchez’s sentence any further than it did. See Sykes, 658 F.3d at 1148.

Zuniga-Sanchez’s challenge to the district court’s denial of safety valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) is not cognizable in this proceeding. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 831, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (only aspects of the sentence affected by the amendment may be raised in section 3582(c)(2) proceedings).

AFFIRMED.

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.