From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Soyoza-Cenin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 28, 2016
CASE NO. 1:01-CR-05421-(2)-LJO (E.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2016)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:01-CR-05421-(2)-LJO

04-28-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LEO SOYOZA-CENIN, Defendant.


MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S SUCCESSIVE MOTION TO REDUCE SENTENCE UNDER U.S.S.G. AMENDMENT 782 (ECF No. 128)

Before the Court is Petitioner Leo Soyoza-Cenin's second pro se motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 ("Section 3582"), U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(1), and Amendment 782 ("the Amendment") to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. (ECF No. 128). The Amendment revised the Drug Quantity Table in § 2D1.1 and reduced by two levels the offense level applicable to many drug trafficking offenses. On March 16, 2016, Petitioner filed a previous motion under Section 3582 (ECF No. 122), which the Court denied on April 26, 2016. See ECF No. 128. Petitioner's April 2016 motion duplicates the arguments he put before the Court in his March 2016 motion.

Petitioner filed his motion under the name Leo Soyoza-Cenin, and is apparently identified this way while incarcerated, despite the Court's finding on December 16, 2002, that his true name is Antonio Mercado-Vasquez. See ECF No. 69.

Hereinafter, all references to sections (§) refer to the United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual ("the Guidelines") unless otherwise indicated. --------

For the same reasons set forth at length in the Court's April 26, 2016 Order, the Court will also deny the instant motion. There is no dispute that Petitioner Soyoza-Cenin was sentenced as a career offender pursuant to § 4B1.1—and not § 2D1.1, the provision changed by Amendment 782. PSR ¶ 31. Because Petitioner's sentence was not based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission, this Court does not have the authority to reduce Petitioner's sentence. See United States v. Charles, 749 F.3d 767, 770 (9th Cir. 2014) ("[R]etroactive amendments regarding sentences under the drug guidelines do not affect individuals who were sentenced as career offenders.").

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner Leo Soyoza-Cenin's pro se motion to reduce his sentence (ECF No. 128) is DENIED, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 28 , 2016

/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Soyoza-Cenin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 28, 2016
CASE NO. 1:01-CR-05421-(2)-LJO (E.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2016)
Case details for

United States v. Soyoza-Cenin

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LEO SOYOZA-CENIN, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Apr 28, 2016

Citations

CASE NO. 1:01-CR-05421-(2)-LJO (E.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2016)