United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 21, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-50823
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
VICTOR ZAMUDIO-HINOJOSA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. EP-01-CR-1130-ALL-H
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Victor Zamudio-Hinojosa, federal prisoner # 17071-180,
appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
motion wherein he argued that the 2001 Sentencing Guidelines
version of § 2L1.2 should be applied retroactively to his
sentence under Amendment 632.
Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines may not be applied
retroactively upon a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) unless
they are specifically set forth in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 02-50823
-2-
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a), p.s. (Nov. 2001). Amendment 632 is not
listed in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c) and therefore may not be applied
retroactively under Zamudio-Hinojosa's motion. See United States
v. Drath, 89 F.3d 216, 218 (5th Cir. 1996) (amendment not listed
in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c) “cannot be given retroactive effect in
the context of a § 3582(c)(2) motion”). Accordingly, the
district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied
Zamudio-Hinojosa’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion.
AFFIRMED.