USA v. Alonso-Gutierrez et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
MIGUEL ALONSO-GUTIERREZ (01),
Defendant.
Case No. 20-20029-01-DDC
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant Miguel Alonso-Gutierrez has filed two pro se1 motions. Doc. 247; Doc. 251.
The two motions are the same. Compare Doc. 247, with Doc. 251. Both ask the court to reduce
Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez’s sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Section 3582(c)(2) authorizes
the court to reduce a sentence “in the case of a defendant who has been sentenced to a term of
imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing
Commission[.]” Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez asserts that the Sentencing Commission lowered his
sentence with the retroactive Amendment 821 to the Sentencing Guidelines.
Specifically, Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez’s motions invoke Amendment 821’s adjustment for
zero-point offenders. Doc. 247 at 1; Doc. 251 at 1. Amendment 821 enacted U.S.S.G. § 4C1.1,
which reduces a defendant’s offense level by two levels if a defendant has zero criminal-history
points and meets other criteria. But Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez received criminal-history points. Doc.
1 	People in prison “who proceed pro se . . . are entitled to liberal construction of their filings[.]”
Toevs v. Reid, 685 F.3d 903, 911 (10th Cir. 2012); see also Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th
Cir. 1991).
Case 2:20-cr-20029-DDC Document 256 Filed 11/17/25 Page 1 of 3

2
244 at 3–4 (Statement of Reasons). So, the new zero-point-offender provision doesn’t apply to
Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez.2
In sum, Amendment 821 doesn’t lower Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez’s Guideline range, so the
court lacks jurisdiction to reduce his sentence further. United States v. C.D., 848 F.3d 1286,
1289 (10th Cir. 2017) (explaining that, to secure sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2), “the
defendant must show he was sentenced based on a guideline range the Sentencing Commission
lowered subsequent to defendant’s sentencing” and if the defendant fails to make this showing,
“the district court lacks jurisdiction over the defendant’s motion and the motion must be
dismissed”).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT THAT defendant Alonso-
Gutierrez’s Motion to Reduce Sentence (Doc. 247) is dismissed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT defendant Alonso-Gutierrez’s Motion for
Reduction of Sentence (Doc. 251) is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2 	The court notes that Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez doesn’t invoke the other part of Amendment 821: Part
A. Part A lowers the criminal-history points a defendant receives if he committed the offense “while
under any criminal justice sentence, including probation, parole, supervised release, imprisonment, work
release, or escape status.” United States Sentencing Commission, Amendment 821,
https://www.ussc.gov/guidelines/amendment/821 (last visited November 13, 2025). The Guidelines
previously added two criminal-history “points if the defendant committed the instant offense while under
any criminal justice sentence[.]” U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(d) (2021). Following Amendment 821, the
Guidelines now add just one-criminal history point if the defendant committed the offense while under a
criminal-justice sentence—and only if the defendant received seven or more criminal-history points.
U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(e) (2024).
Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez hasn’t invoked Part A. That’s likely because the court already gave Mr.
Alonso-Gutierrez the benefit of Part A and he waived the right to an adjustment on this ground. See Doc.
244 at 3–4 (Statement of Reasons) (noting that Amendment 821 would apply to Mr. Alonso-Gutierrez
and applying two-level downward variance to lower Guidelines range appropriately).
Case 2:20-cr-20029-DDC Document 256 Filed 11/17/25 Page 2 of 3

3
Dated this 14th day of November, 2025, at Kansas City, Kansas.
s/ Daniel D. Crabtree
Daniel D. Crabtree
United States District Judge
Case 2:20-cr-20029-DDC Document 256 Filed 11/17/25 Page 3 of 3