United States of America v. Felipe De Jesus Corona-Verbera

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
FELIPE DE JESUS CORONA-VERBERA,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-10431
D.C. No. 4:91-cr-00446-FRZ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Frank R. Zapata, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Felipe de Jesus Corona-Verbera appeals pro se from the district court’s order
denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Corona-Verbera contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under
* 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
MAY 17 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-10431
Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a
district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See
United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). Corona-Verbera was
convicted of offenses involving approximately 924 kilograms of cocaine. Even
after Amendment 782, the base offense level for that drug amount is 38. See
U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(1) (2014). Because Amendment 782 did not lower Corona-
Verbera’s applicable guideline range, the district court correctly concluded that he
is ineligible for a sentence reduction. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.10(a)(2)(B); Leniear, 574 F.3d at 673-74. Contrary to Corona-Verbera’s
contention, once the district court determined his ineligibility, it was not required
to consider the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) before denying his
section 3582(c)(2) motion. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826 (2010)
(the court first must determine that a sentence reduction under section 3582 is
consistent with section 1B1.10 before it may consider whether the authorized
reduction is warranted under the section 3553(a) factors).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --