United States of America v. Lawrence M. Tuitele

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
LAWRENCE M. TUITELE,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-10222
D.C. No. 1:13-cr-00593-JMS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
J. Michael Seabright, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 14, 2017**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Lawrence M. Tuitele 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.
Tuitele contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under
FILED
FEB 27 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a
district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See
United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). The district court
correctly concluded that Tuitele is ineligible for a sentence reduction because
Amendment 782 did not lower his applicable sentencing range. See 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2); Leniear, 574 F.3d at 673. Contrary to Tuitele’s argument, the district
court properly determined his applicable guidelines range without regard to the
downward departure that the court granted at his original sentencing. See U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(A); United States v. Ornelas, 825 F.3d 548, 554-55 (9th Cir.
2016).
AFFIRMED.
16-10222 2

-- 2 of 2 --