[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-13521 APRIL 22, 2009
Non-Argument Calendar THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 02-00008-CR-6
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM ERIC GREEN,
a.k.a. Cuzzo,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Georgia
_________________________
(April 22, 2009)
Before BARKETT, MARCUS and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
William Green, a pro se federal prisoner convicted of crack cocaine
offenses, appeals the district court’s limited reduction of his sentence, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The district court found that Amendment 706 to the
United States Sentencing Guidelines was applicable to Green and reduced his
previous offense level from 34 to 32 and his original sentence from 240 months’
imprisonment to 235 months’ imprisonment.
On appeal Green contends that the district court erred by (1) not
resentencing him below his amended Guidelines range and not applying
intervening Supreme Court caselaw; (2) not granting a downward departure from
the amended guideline range after considering his post-sentence rehabilitation; (3)
not appointing counsel; (4) failing to provide a new or updated PSI; and (5) ruling
on his § 3582(c)(2) motion before ruling on his second or successive 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 motion.
Green’s first argument is foreclosed by this court’s recent decision in United
States v. Melvin, — F.3d —, 2009 WL 236053 (11th Cir. 2009) (holding that, in
resentencing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), a district court is bound by the
applicable policy statement of the Sentencing Commission that prohibits the
district court from imposing a sentence that is less than the minimum of the
amended guidelines range). We find no merit in Green’s remaining arguments.
AFFIRMED.
2