United States v. Dino Lomeli


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Steven M. Colloton, Bobby E. Shepherd and James M. Moody, Jr. (UNPUBLISHED); Denying [4294150-2] [4312670-3] pro se motions for leave to object filed by Appellant Mr. Dino Lomeli. [4425313] [15-2154]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-2154 ___________________________ United States of America, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Dino Lomeli, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant. ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids ____________ Submitted: April 15, 2016 Filed: July 13, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges, and MOODY,1 District Judge. ____________ PER CURIAM. 1 The Honorable James M. Moody, Jr, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, sitting by designation. Appellate Case: 15-2154 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Entry ID: 4425313 Dino Lomeli appeals after the district court2 denied him a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). In declining to reduce Mr. Lomeli’s sentence, the district court found that a reduction was not warranted in light of his criminal history, which included murder, his leadership in an international marijuana smuggling organization, his post-sentencing conduct and the risk to public safety posed by a reduction in his term of imprisonment. We conclude that there is no basis for reversal, as the district court's finding that a reduction was not warranted was not an abuse of discretion. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 827 (2010) (§ 3582(c) authorizes district court to reduce sentence by applying amended Guidelines range as if it were in effect at time of original sentencing, and leaving all other Guidelines determinations intact as previously determined); United States v. Long, 757 F.3d 762, 763 (8th Cir.2014) (de novo review of whether § 3582(c)(2) authorizes modification, and abuse-of-discretion review of decision whether to grant authorized § 3582(c)(2) modification); United States v. Curry, 584 F.3d 1102, 1103-05 (8th Cir.2009) (district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to reduce defendant's sentence under § 3582(c)(2) due to defendant's criminal history). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. We deny Lomeli’s pro se motions for leave to object. ______________________________ 2 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. -2- Appellate Case: 15-2154 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Entry ID: 4425313

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?