United States of America v. Travis Waipa

15-10392Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit22 de jun. de 2016

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TRAVIS WAIPA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 15-10392
D.C. No. 1:11-cr-00381-JMS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
J. Michael Seabright, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 14, 2016**
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Travis Waipa 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. Reviewing de novo, see United States v.
Sykes, 658 F.3d 1140, 1144 (9th Cir. 2011), we affirm.
FILED
JUN 22 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 --

Waipa contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment
782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. In the alternative, he argues that, even if
Amendment 782 does not authorize a reduction in his sentence, the district court
should have resentenced him to 108 months, the bottom of his Guidelines range.
These claims fail. Waipa’s 120-month sentence reflects the mandatory minimum
for his offense. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(viii). The mandatory minimum
applies in section 3582(c)(2) proceedings. See Sykes, 658 F.3d at 1147-48. Thus,
the district court correctly concluded that it had no authority to reduce Waipa's
sentence below 120 months. See id. at 1148.
AFFIRMED.
15-10392 2

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.