United States of America v. Manuel Valle

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MANUEL VALLE,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-10156
D.C. No. 2:02-cr-00213-MCE
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 8, 2017**
Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Manuel Valle 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.
Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009), we affirm.
FILED
MAR 14 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 --

Valle contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment
782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The district court properly concluded that Valle
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
673-74. Moreover, because the court lacked authority to reduce Valle’s sentence,
it had no reason to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. See Dillon
v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826-27 (2010).
AFFIRMED.
16-10156 2

-- 2 of 2 --