United States v. Rivera

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJune 26, 2025
Docket24-4701
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Rivera (United States v. Rivera) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Rivera, (9th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 26 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-4701 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 3:21-cr-03382-AJB-1 v. MEMORANDUM* JAMES CHARLES RIVERA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Anthony J. Battaglia, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 18, 2025**

Before: CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and SUNG, Circuit Judges.

James Charles Rivera appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying

his 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.

Rivera contends that the district court incorrectly concluded he was

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). ineligible for a sentence reduction. He argues that ineligibility under U.S.S.G.

§ 4C1.1(a)(10)1 is established only when a defendant both received an adjustment

under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 and engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise, and he

did not meet the latter criterion. This argument is foreclosed by United States v.

Gonzalez-Loera, 135 F.4th 856, 857 (9th Cir. 2025) (“[W]e hold that [U.S.S.G.

§ 4C1.1(a)(10)] contains two distinct requirements, and a defendant must satisfy

both to obtain relief. Thus, a defendant is ineligible for relief under § 4C1.1 if

he either received an adjustment under § 3B1.1 or engaged in a continuing

criminal enterprise.”). Because there is no dispute that Rivera received an

adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1, the district court correctly determined he was

ineligible for a sentence reduction. See Gonzalez-Loera, 135 F.4th at 861.

AFFIRMED.

1 The United States Sentencing Commission amended § 4C1.1, effective November 1, 2024, after the district court denied Rivera’s motion. Rivera relies on the version in effect at the time his motion was filed and decided.

2 24-4701

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Gonzalez-Loera
135 F.4th 856 (Ninth Circuit, 2025)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Rivera, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rivera-ca9-2025.