USA V. TRAVIS WAIPA, No. 15-10392 (9th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED JUN 22 2016 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 15-10392 D.C. No. 1:11-cr-00381-JMS v. MEMORANDUM* TRAVIS WAIPA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii J. Michael Seabright, Chief Judge, Presiding Submitted June 14, 2016** Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Travis Waipa 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. Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Sykes, 658 F.3d 1140, 1144 (9th Cir. 2011), we affirm. * 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). Waipa contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. In the alternative, he argues that, even if Amendment 782 does not authorize a reduction in his sentence, the district court should have resentenced him to 108 months, the bottom of his Guidelines range. These claims fail. Waipa’s 120-month sentence reflects the mandatory minimum for his offense. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(viii). The mandatory minimum applies in section 3582(c)(2) proceedings. See Sykes, 658 F.3d at 1147-48. Thus, the district court correctly concluded that it had no authority to reduce Waipa's sentence below 120 months. See id. at 1148. AFFIRMED. 2 15-10392

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.