IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-60693
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RONNIE MONTGOMERY,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Mississippi
3:01-CV-61-S
May 3, 2002
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ronnie Montgomery appeals the district court’s denial of his
motion, contending that the district court improperly construed his
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. In his
motion Montgomery referred to § 3582(c)(2) and requested a
reduction of sentence. We accept Montgomery’s assertion that he
raised his claims under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and address his
claims under that statute.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
The district court may modify a defendant’s term of
imprisonment “in the case of a defendant who has been sentenced to
a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has
subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to
28 U.S.C. [§] 994(o).”1 Montgomery claims that the Supreme Court’s
decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey2 constituted a change in
Sentencing Guidelines for which he should receive relief. He has
not identified a sentencing range that has subsequently been
lowered by the Sentencing Commission, and thus the district court
did not have authority to reduce his sentence under § 3582(c)(2).
Montgomery does not assert that his claims of ineffective
assistance of counsel or his assertions regarding his completion of
prison rehabilitation programs set forth grounds for a reduction of
sentence, and any such claim is deemed abandoned. AFFIRMED on
alternative grounds.
1
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).
2
530 U.S. 466 (2000).
2