Opinion
No. 08-1809.
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) July 13, 2009.
Filed: July 27, 2009.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Criminal No. 06-cr-00184-001), District Judge: Honorable James M. Munley.
William S. Houser, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Scranton, PA, Theodore B. Smith, III, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Harrisburg, PA, for United States of America.
Carl J. Poveromo, Esq., Rinaldi Poveromo, Scranton, PA, for Appellant.
Before: RENDELL, FUENTES and ROTH, Circuit Judges.
OPINION OF THE COURT
This appeal raises a single issue: whether a district court may reduce a defendant's sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), the statutory provision allowing a court to reduce a sentence which is "based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission," when that sentence is imposed pursuant to a binding plea agreement. The District Court concluded that enforcement of the stipulated sentence was mandatory; defendant Jose Perez-Cordero appealed. We conclusively resolved the issue in United States v. Sanchez, holding, "If 'binding' is to have meaning, it cannot be undone by the discretionary possibility of a different sentence under § 3582(c)." 562 F.3d 275, 282 (3d Cir. 2009).
The District Court had jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3231. We exercise jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
Here, Perez-Cordero stipulated to the sentence imposed in a binding plea agreement under Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(c)(1)(c), the validity of which is undisputed. Accordingly, we will AFFIRM the order of the District Court.
Perez-Cordero also contends that the District Court should have conducted a hearing on whether a sentence reduction was appropriate under § 3582(c)(2). Because a sentence reduction was not permissible here, Perez-Cordero suffered no prejudice from the District Court's refusal to hold a hearing.