Opinion
No. 12-10507 D.C. No. 3:08-CR-00890-MMC-2
2013-10-10
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JAY KENT, Defendant - Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Maxine M. Chesney, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 7, 2013
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
--------
San Francisco, California
Before: D.W. NELSON, M. SMITH, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Jay Kent appeals the denial of his motion for reduction in sentence brought under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a), and we affirm.
Assuming, without deciding, that Kent's motion for reduction in sentence did not violate his plea agreement, our holding in United States v. Augustine, 712 F.3d 1290 (9th Cir. 2013), forecloses Kent's arguments that the Fair Sentencing Act's mandatory minimums should apply retroactively to defendants sentenced before the Act was enacted. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Kent's § 3582(c)(2) motion.
AFFIRMED.