United States v. Robertson

Full title: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alton Anthony ROBERTSON…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 18, 2006

203 F. App'x 139 (9th Cir. 2006)

Opinion

Submitted Oct. 16, 2006. ^*

* This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, appellant's request for an evidentiary hearing in this court is denied.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Becky S. Walker, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Alton Anthony Robertson, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-93-00437-R-01.

Before: T.G. NELSON, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Alton Anthony Robertson appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his motion for modification of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Robertson contends that the district court erred by failing to determine whether Amendment 506 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines applied retroactively to his sentence. Further, Robertson argues that Amendment 506 qualifies him for a reduction in sentence. We disagree.

It is undisputed that Amendment 506, if applicable, would be retroactive. See U.S. S.G. § 1B1.10(c).

Robertson was sentenced pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2113(d). Because section 2113(d) authorizes no sentence enhancement provisions that have any effect on the statutory maximum, Amendment 506 is inapplicable to Robertson's sentence. See U.S. S.G.App. C, Amendment 506 (amending definition of "offense statutory maximum"); United States v. Townsend, 98 F.3d 510, 513 (9th Cir.1996) (per curiam) (noting that because Amendment 506 has no effect on the statutory maximum sentence

Page 140.

for a violation of § 2113(a), it was inapplicable to appellant's sentence). Consequently, the district court properly denied Robertson's section 3582(c)(2) motion.

AFFIRMED.