United States v. Collins

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit

No. 19-31018
Summary Calendar

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Daniel Wayne Collins,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 5:04-CR-50170-4

Before Jones, Barksdale, and Stewart, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Daniel Wayne Collins, proceeding pro se on appeal, pleaded guilty to:
conspiring to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 841(a)(1), 846; and possession of a firearm in relation to a drug-trafficking
offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). He was sentenced to, inter

*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
November 2, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Case: 19-31018 Document: 00515622410 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/02/2020

No. 19-31018
2
alia: 168-months’ imprisonment for his conspiracy-to-distribute-
methamphetamine charge; and a consecutive term of 60-months’
imprisonment on the firearm charge.
In the light of Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines, Collins
moved, in 2014, for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2). The district court denied his motion, citing public safety
concerns due to Collins’ use of weapons during the underlying offense. Our
court affirmed. United States v. Collins, 712 F. App’x 392, 396 (5th Cir. 2017).
In 2018, Collins filed a successive § 3582(c)(2) motion because,
according to his claim, information regarding the need to avoid unwarranted
sentencing disparities was unavailable when he filed his first motion. See 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6). Collins cited several cases purporting to show similarly-
situated defendants who received a reduction despite the involvement of a
weapon in the underlying drug offense. The motion was denied.
Appealing the denial of that motion, Collins claims the court abused
its discretion because denial of his motion creates a sentence disparity. A
court’s decision whether to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) is reviewed
for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Henderson, 636 F.3d 713, 717 (5th
Cir. 2011). Although the court acknowledged Collins’ disparity contentions,
it concluded a reduction was not warranted “due to public safety
considerations” in the light of Collins’ possessing a weapon during
commission of the underlying offense, for which he pleaded guilty to such
possession as a separate offense.
The court considered the § 3582(c)(2) motion and applicable
§ 3553(a) sentencing factors; Collins has not demonstrated error. Therefore,
the court did not abuse its discretion. See Henderson, 636 F.3d at 718.
AFFIRMED; Collins’ request for a different judge on remand is
DENIED as moot.
Case: 19-31018 Document: 00515622410 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/02/2020