United States of America v. Romuald Andreyevich Voytsekhovskiy

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROMUALD ANDREYEVICH
VOYTSEKHOVSKIY,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 15-30155
D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00008-SEH
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 26, 2016**
Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Romuald Andreyevich Voytsekhovskiy appeals 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. We review de novo whether a district
FILED
APR 29 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

court has authority to reduce a sentence under section 3582(c)(2), see United States
v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009), and we affirm.
Voytsekhovskiy contends that the district court had authority to reduce his
sentence under Amendment 782 even though his Guidelines range was not lowered
by the amendment. We disagree. Voytsekhovskiy’s equitable arguments
notwithstanding, a district court may only lower a sentence under section
3582(c)(2) when the defendant’s applicable Guidelines range has been lowered.
See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B), cmt. n.1(A); Leniear, 574
F.3d at 673-74. Thus, the district court properly denied Voytsekhovskiy’s motion.
AFFIRMED.
15-30155 2

-- 2 of 2 --