United States of America v. Raymond Eugene Cotharn

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).
AK/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RAYMOND EUGENE COTHARN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-30230
D.C. No. 1:01-cr-00065-CCL
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Charles C. Lovell, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Raymond Eugene Cotharn appeals from the district court’s order denying his
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
FEB 03 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AK/Research 08-30230 2
Cotharn contends that the district court erred in denying his motion for
resentencing pursuant to the retroactive amendments to the crack cocaine
Sentencing Guidelines. The district court did not err in denying the motion
because Cotharn was sentenced as a career offender pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1.
See United States v. Wesson, 583 F.3d 728, 731 (9th Cir. 2009).
Moreover, Cotharn’s contention that the district court had authority under
United States v. Hicks, 472 F.3d 1167 (9th Cir. 2007), to resentence him pursuant
to the advisory Guidelines lacks merit. See U.S.S.G § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(A) (2008);
see also United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 673-74 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --