United States of America v. Jerome Isaako Lauina

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JEROME ISAAKO LAUINA,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 22-10087
D.C. No. 1:13-cr-00999-DKW-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
Derrick K. Watson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 15, 2022**
Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.
Jerome Isaako Lauina appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his motion for a sentence reduction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
To the extent Lauina’s motion sought compassionate release, the district
* 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
NOV 23 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 22-10087
court properly denied relief because as the government asserts, Lauina failed to
exhaust his administrative remedies before filing the motion. See 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A); United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1282 (9th Cir. 2021)
(holding that § 3582(c)(1)(A)’s exhaustion requirement “is mandatory and must be
enforced when properly raised by the government”). To the extent Lauina sought
relief under section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018, the district court properly
concluded that the First Step Act is inapplicable to Lauina because he was
sentenced after the enactment of the Fair Sentencing Act. See Pub. L. No. 115-
391, § 404(b), 132 Stat. 5194, 5222 (2018) (making certain portions of the Fair
Sentencing Act retroactive to defendants sentenced before August 3, 2010).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --