United States of America v. Glenn Bosworth

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
GLENN BOSWORTH,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 18-50167
D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00052-ODW-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Otis D. Wright, II, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 15, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Glenn Bosworth 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.
Bosworth contends that he is entitled to 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
JUL 18 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-50167
Amendment 810 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). Bosworth is ineligible
for a sentence reduction because Amendment 810 is not a covered amendment
under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(d). See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(A) (“Eligibility for
consideration under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is triggered only by an amendment
listed in subsection (d).”). Even if it were, Amendment 810 did not have the effect
of lowering Bosworth’s Guidelines range because the record reflects that he
received a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility at his original
sentencing hearing. Accordingly, the district court did not err by denying
Bosworth’s motion. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B); Leniear, 574 F.3d at 673.
We do not reach Bosworth’s other arguments because they are not
cognizable in a section 3582(c)(2) proceeding. See Dillon v. United States, 560
U.S. 817, 825-26, 831 (2010) (alleged errors unrelated to an amendment that
lowers the defendant’s guideline range are outside the scope of a section
3582(c)(2) proceeding).
Bosworth’s motion to seal is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --