USA v. Alexis Estevez
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [17-40536 Affirmed ] Judge: CDK , Judge: JWE , Judge: SAH Mandate issue date is 11/30/2017 [17-40536]
Date Filed: 11/08/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
November 8, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:03-CR-588-1
Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Alexis Estevez, federal prisoner # 71905-079, appeals the district court’s
grant of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction. Estevez
argues that the district court erred in reducing his sentence on the possessionwith-intent-to-distribute-marijuana count to 97 months rather than to 87
months. He asserts that his total original sentence of 130 months was in the
middle of the guidelines range and that the district court was obligated to give
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Date Filed: 11/08/2017
him a reduction that resulted in a total sentence in the middle of the amended
range. We review the district court’s decision whether to reduce a sentence
under § 3582(c)(2) for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d
667, 672 (5th Cir. 2009).
A district court abuses its discretion by making a legal error, basing its
decision on a clearly erroneous assessment of evidence, or by failing to consider
factors that it is required by law to examine. United States v. Larry, 632 F.3d
933, 936 (5th Cir. 2011). The record reflects that the district court considered
the policy statement of U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 and the applicable 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) factors.
Estevez cannot show that the district court abused its
discretion by not granting him a greater reduction in sentence. United States
v. Whitebird, 55 F.3d 1007, 1010 (5th Cir. 1995).
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?