USA V. ELADIO BOUZA, No. 12-50238 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 09 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 12-50238 D.C. No. 3:90-cr-00856-JAH v. MEMORANDUM* ELADIO SOTO BOUZA, a.k.a. Fantoma, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 19, 2013** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. Eladio Soto Bouza appeals pro se 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. We review de novo whether the district court had * 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). authority to modify a defendant s sentence under section 3582(c)(2), see United States v. Austin, 676 F.3d 924, 926 (9th Cir. 2012), and we affirm. Bouza contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction because the government failed to comply with the requirements of 21 U.S.C. § 851 at his original sentencing. This contention does not support relief under section 3582(c)(2). See Dillon v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2683, 2691 (2010) (section 3582(c)(2) authorizes only a limited adjustment to an otherwise final sentence and not a plenary resentencing proceeding ). Bouza is not entitled to relief under section 3582(c)(2) because he was sentenced in 1991 to a life term, the statutory mandatory minimum under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) (1991), and not based on a Guidelines range that was subsequently lowered. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); see also United States v. Augustine, 712 F.3d 1290, 1295 (9th Cir. 2013) (the Fair Sentencing Act s new mandatory minimums do not apply to defendants who were sentenced before the Act s effective date). AFFIRMED. 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.