[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-14751 APRIL 7, 2009
Non-Argument Calendar THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 98-00108-CR-2-LSC-TMP
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
IMARI MAISHA MACKEY,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Alabama
_________________________
(April 7, 2009)
Before CARNES, WILSON, and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Imari Maisha Mackey, proceeding pro se, appeals the denial of his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) motion for a reduced sentence based on Amendment 706 to the
Sentencing Guidelines. The district court denied Mackey’s § 3582(c)(2) motion
because Amendment 706 did not have the effect of lowering his guideline range.
His guidelines range was 360 months to life before the amendment and would have
been 360 months to life after the amendment. Mackey argues that the district
court erred by declining to reduce his sentence without first considering the
sentencing factors identified in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
Under § 3582(c)(2) a sentence reduction must be consistent with the
Commission’s policy statement, which is found at U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10. In that
policy statement the Commission has instructed us that a reduction is not
consistent with the applicable policy statement if the amendment “does not have
the effect of lowering the defendant’s applicable guideline range.” U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.10(a)(2)(B) (Nov. 2008). That limitation on the scope of Amendment 703 is
not affected by the United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005),
decision. See United States v. Melvin, 556 F.3d 1190, 1192 (11th Cir. 2009).
Accordingly, there is no basis for any requirement that a district court consider the
§ 3553(a) factors, which do not affect the actual guidelines range, before deciding
whether it can reduce a sentence under Amendment 706.
AFFIRMED
2