United States of America v. Quintin Stephen

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
QUINTIN STEPHEN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-50147
D.C. No. 2:94-cr-00254-SGL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stephen G. Larson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Quintin Stephen appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion
under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a reduced sentence. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
SEP 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-50147 2
Stephen contends that the district court erred by failing to reduce his
sentence in light of Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines.
Because the record reflects that Stephen’s original sentence was not “based on a
sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing
Commission,” the district court did not err. See Dillon v. United States, 130 S. Ct.
2683, 2690-91 (2010). Stephen’s contention that the district court was entitled to
treat the corresponding base offense levels and drug quantities in the Guidelines as
advisory in light of Booker is foreclosed. See id. at 2690-92.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --