United States of America v. Jaime Moreno

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JAIME MORENO,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-30095
D.C. No. 1:99-cr-00048-SPW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Jaime Moreno appeals pro se from the district court's denial of his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668,
672 (9th Cir. 2009), we affirm.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
FEB 16 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-30095
In the district court, Moreno moved for a sentence reduction in light of
Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). The district court correctly
concluded that this claim does not provide a basis for relief under section
3582(c)(2). See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 824-26 (2010) (section
3582(c)(2) does not authorize a resentencing proceeding, but rather authorizes the
district court to modify a sentence in the “limited circumstance[]” where a
defendant who was sentenced based on a sentencing range that was subsequently
lowered).
On appeal, Moreno raises several new arguments, including claims
challenging his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), the effectiveness of his trial
counsel, and the length of his sentence. These claims are not properly before us,
see United States v. Antonakeas, 255 F.3d 714, 721 (9th Cir. 2001), and are outside
the scope of a section 3582(c)(2) motion, see Dillon, 560 U.S. at 831.
To the extent Moreno seeks to recall the mandate in one of his previous
appeals, that request may not be raised in this appeal.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --