United States of America v. Jorge Roca-Suarez, a.k.a. George Roca, a.k.a. Jorge Roca

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JORGE ROCA-SUAREZ, a.k.a. George
Roca, a.k.a. Jorge Roca,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 13-50393
D.C. No. 2:90-cr-00877-SVW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 13, 2014**
Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Jorge Roca-Suarez 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.
FILED
MAY 22 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

Roca-Suarez contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under
Amendment 591 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). Contrary to
Roca-Suarez’s contention, Amendment 591 did not alter the Guidelines section
applicable to his offense of conviction or the calculation of his Guidelines range
under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1. See U.S.S.G. app. C, amend. 591 (Supp. 2003); see also
United States v. McEnry, 659 F.3d 893, 898-99 (9th Cir. 2011) (discussing changes
made by Amendment 591). Because Amendment 591 did not lower Roca-Suarez’s
Guidelines range, the district court lacked authority to reduce his sentence. See 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); Leniear, 574 F.3d at 674.
Roca-Suarez also contends that the district court erred by failing to explain
the reasons for its denial of his motion. Because the court had no authority to
modify Roca-Suarez’s sentence, however, its summary denial was not improper.
AFFIRMED.
13-50393 2

-- 2 of 2 --