United States v. Spears, No. 13-30253 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant, convicted of crimes related to his involvement in a cocaine trafficking conspiracy, appealed the denial of a motion to modify his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The court held that the district court correctly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to modify defendant's sentence in 2013. In this case, the district court was correct to find that defendant was responsible for more than 8.4 kilograms of crack cocaine. Defendant’s applicable Guidelines range under the drug quantity table, as modified by Amendment 750, would therefore be the same as the Guidelines range before the Amendment. Therefore, the Amendment did not have the effect of lowering defendant's applicable guideline range and modifying defendant's sentence would not be consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Commission. The court also held that the district court did not err when it relied on factual findings from the 2001 sentencing hearing where defendant cites no authority for his contrary assertion that the 2013 court should have ignored factual findings in the 2001 sentencing proceeding because of a possible Rule 32 violation. Finally, the court held that Amendment 782 does not provide a basis for reversing the district court’s denial of defendant's motion because Amendment 782 went into effect after the district court denied defendant's motion in 2013 based on the pre-Amendment 782 drug quantity table. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed the district court’s denial of a motion to modify a sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) on the basis of Sentencing Guidelines Amendment 750, which raised the quantity thresholds for certain offenses involving crack cocaine. When the defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment in a conspiracy case in 2001, the maximum base offense level of 38 was triggered for a crack cocaine offense if the conduct involved at least 1.5 kilograms of the drug. Pursuant to Amendment 750, made retroactive by the Sentencing Commission, the threshold was increased to 8.4 kilograms. The panel held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to modify the defendant’s sentence because the amended Guidelines table would still yield a Guidelines range of life imprisonment where, at sentencing in 2001, the district court found that 11 kilograms of powder cocaine, which was to be cooked into crack cocaine, was part of the defendant’s relevant conduct. The panel held that a motion to modify a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) was not a proper vehicle for arguing that the district court failed to comply with Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c) by not responding to each of the defendant’s objections to the presentence report at sentencing in 2001. UNITED STATES V. SPEARS 3 The panel held that Guidelines Amendment 782, which further raised the crack cocaine quantity thresholds, did not provide a basis for reversing the denial of the defendant’s motion to modify his sentence. Amendment 782 went into effect in November 2014, after the district court’s denied the defendant’s motion in 2013. The panel stated that the defendant would need to file a new motion under § 3582(c)(2) in order to benefit from Amendment 782. Dissenting, Judge Tashima wrote that the district court had jurisdiction to consider the defendant’s motion on the merits because he was sentenced based on a sentencing range that was subsequently lowered by the Sentencing Commission. Judge Tashima also wrote that even under the majority’s approach, the sentencing court did not make any specific finding that the defendant’s offense conduct involved at least 8.4 kilograms of crack cocaine. Judge Tashima would reverse and remand for the district court to exercise its discretion as to whether the defendant’s sentence should be reduced.
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.