Testo completo
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SHERARD W. HENDERSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-30003
D.C. No. 2:08-cr-00099-RHW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Robert H. Whaley, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Sherard W. Henderson appeals from the district court’s order denying his 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
SEP 21 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS
-- 1 of 2 --
12-30003 2
Henderson contends that the district court abused its discretion by denying
his motion to reduce his sentence. He asserts that, by denying the motion on the
basis of his criminal history, the district court improperly double counted his
criminal history. Contrary to Henderson’s contention, the district court properly
denied his motion based on public safety considerations. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10
cmt. n.1(B)(ii); United States v. Lightfoot, 626 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th Cir. 2010).
AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
