USA V. KEVIN DOUCETTE, No. 12-50370 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 12 2013 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 12-50370 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, D.C. No. 09-217-GHK Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MEMORANDUM* KEVIN DOUCETTE, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George H. King, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted October 9, 2013 Pasadena, California Before: REINHARDT, KLEINFELD, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Kevin Doucette appeals the district court s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether a district court may modify an * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. 1 otherwise final sentence under § 3582. United States v. Wesson, 583 F.3d 728, 730 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm. Section 3582(c)(2) allows modification of a term of imprisonment when: (1) the sentence is based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission; and (2) such reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission. Id. Doucette argues that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 750, which made permanent earlier modifications to the drug quantity table in United States Sentencing Guideline ( U.S.S.G. ) § 2D1.1 for offenses involving crack cocaine. But Doucette was sentenced as a career offender pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. Therefore, his sentence was not based on a Guideline range that has been lowered, and was ineligible for modification under § 3582. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); Wesson, 583 F.3d at 731 32. Because Doucette cannot satisfy the first requirement for a sentence modification under § 3582(c)(2), we need not consider Doucette s ex post facto challenge to U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 the Guideline that sets out the policy statements relevant to the second requirement for a sentence modification under § 3582(c)(2). 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.
