United States v. Pablo Carrillo

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-2889

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Pablo J. Carrillo,

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

____________

Submitted: April 16, 2018 Filed: April 30, 2018

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate Pablo Carrillo appeals the district court’s1 denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence under Guidelines Amendment 782,

1 The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

which lowered the base offense levels for certain drug offenses. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has submitted a brief arguing that the district court erred in denying Carrillo’s motion without holding an evidentiary hearing. Carrillo has filed a pro se supplemental brief challenging the legality and reasonableness of his sentence.

We conclude the district court did not err in denying Carrillo’s motion without holding a hearing. See United States v. Starks, 551 F.3d 839, 842-43 (8th Cir. 2009). Next, we reject Carrillo’s pro se challenges to his sentence, because section 3582(c)(2) confers jurisdiction only to determine whether a sentence should be reduced due to a retroactive Guidelines amendment, not for unrelated challenges to the sentence. See United States v. Auman, 8 F.3d 1268, 1271-72 (8th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we affirm.

______________________________