USA v. Ignacio Garcia, No. 16-50152 (5th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 16-50152 Document: 00513725998 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/19/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-50152 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 19, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. IGNACIO LUNA GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:13-CR-155-1 Before JOLLY, WIENER, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ignacio Luna Garcia, federal prisoner # 53034-280, seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion seeking modification of his sentence for possession with the intent to distribute methamphetamine and illegal reentry based on Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. By moving to proceed IFP, Garcia is challenging the district court’s certification decision that his Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 16-50152 Document: 00513725998 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/19/2016 No. 16-50152 appeal was not taken in good faith because it is frivolous. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). In this court, Garcia argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a reduction of sentence. He contends that he is not a threat to public safety and asserts that a reduction of sentence should have been granted. We review for abuse of discretion a district court’s decision whether to reduce a sentence pursuant to § 3582(c)(2). United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d 667, 672 (5th Cir. 2009). In its order denying relief, the district court recognized that Garcia was eligible for a sentence reduction. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826-27 (2010). However, the district court denied Garcia’s motion as a matter of discretion, referring specifically to the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and Garcia’s extensive criminal history. Garcia has not shown that the district court abused its discretion by denying him a sentence reduction. See United States v. Whitebird, 55 F.3d 1007, 1010 (5th Cir. 1995). This appeal does not present a nonfrivolous issue. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, Garcia’s motion for leave to proceed IFP is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. 2
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.
