From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Tuitele

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Feb 27, 2017
No. 16-10222 (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 2017)

Opinion

No. 16-10222

02-27-2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LAWRENCE M. TUITELE, Defendant-Appellant.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 1:13-cr-00593-JMS MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii
J. Michael Seabright, Chief Judge, Presiding Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Lawrence M. Tuitele 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, and we affirm.

Tuitele contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). The district court correctly concluded that Tuitele 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. Contrary to Tuitele's argument, the district court properly determined his applicable guidelines range without regard to the downward departure that the court granted at his original sentencing. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(A); United States v. Ornelas, 825 F.3d 548, 554-55 (9th Cir. 2016).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Tuitele

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Feb 27, 2017
No. 16-10222 (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 2017)
Case details for

United States v. Tuitele

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LAWRENCE M. TUITELE…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Feb 27, 2017

Citations

No. 16-10222 (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 2017)