United States of America v. JOSE MANUEL ARCINIEGA, AKA Jessie Gonzalez-Rodriguez

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
SZ/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOSE MANUEL ARCINIEGA, AKA
Jessie Gonzalez-Rodriguez,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-10427
D.C. No. 2:94-cr-00251-GEB
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Garland E. Burrell, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Jose Manuel Arciniega appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
DEC 17 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

SZ/Research 08-10427 2
Arciniega contends that the district court erred when it denied his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction under Amendment 709 to U.S.S.G.
§ 4A1.2(c)(1)(A). Because that Amendment is not referenced by U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.10(c), Arciniega is not eligible for a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2).
See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a) (2008); United States v. Cueto, 9
F.3d 1438, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --