LAW.coLAW.co

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Vanessa Maria BISHOP, Defendant-Appellant

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit2017-02-21No. No. 16-50058
677 F. App'x 409

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

MEMORANDUM

Vanessa Maria Bishop appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 8582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Bishop contends that she is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. Contrary to Bishop’s contention, the district court properly calculated her amended Guidelines range without considering the four-level fast-track departure that the court granted at her original sentencing. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(A); United States v. Ornelas, 825 F.3d 548, 555 (9th Cir. 2016). Because Bishop received a 70-month sentence, which is below the amended Guidelines range, the district court properly denied her motion for a sentence reduction. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) (“[T]he court shah not reduce the defendant’s term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 8582(c)(2) and this policy statement to a term that is less than the minimum of the amended guideline range.’’).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publi-, cation and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.