United States v. Vanessa Bishop

677 F. App'x 409
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 21, 2017
Docket16-50058
StatusUnpublished

This text of 677 F. App'x 409 (United States v. Vanessa Bishop) 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. Vanessa Bishop, 677 F. App'x 409 (9th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Vanessa Maria Bishop appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 8582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Bishop contends that she is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. Contrary to Bishop’s contention, the district court properly calculated her amended Guidelines range without considering the four-level fast-track departure that the court granted at her original sentencing. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(A); United States v. Ornelas, 825 F.3d 548, 555 (9th Cir. 2016). Because Bishop received a 70-month sentence, which is below the amended Guidelines range, the district court properly denied her motion for a sentence reduction. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) (“[T]he court shah not reduce the defendant’s term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 8582(c)(2) and this policy statement to a term that is less than the minimum of the amended guideline range.’’).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publi-, cation and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

Related

United States v. Hector Ornelas
825 F.3d 548 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
677 F. App'x 409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-vanessa-bishop-ca9-2017.