Case: 15-60629 Document: 00513561852 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/23/2016
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 15-60629 FILED
Summary Calendar June 23, 2016
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
REGINALD E. GREEN,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 1:94-CR-1-1
Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Reginald E. Green, federal prisoner # 63828-080, is serving a 384-month
term of imprisonment for conspiring to possess with the intent to distribute
cocaine base and participating in a continuing criminal enterprise. He appeals
the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a reduction of
sentence based on Amendment 782 to the United States Sentencing
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Case: 15-60629 Document: 00513561852 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/23/2016
No. 15-60629
Guidelines, which lowered the base offense levels in the drug quantity table
set forth in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c).
Green contends that the district court misapplied the guidelines to arrive
at his original sentence by including a four-level role adjustment in his offense-
level calculation. In determining the effect of an amendment for purposes of
§ 3582(c)(2), a defendant’s other applicable sentencing adjustments and
criminal history remain unchanged. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(1), p.s. As Green’s
argument challenges Green’s original sentencing, it is not cognizable under
§ 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d 667, 674 (5th Cir. 2009).
At his original sentencing, Green was assigned a base offense level of 38
under § 2D1.1(c)(1) because his offense involved 40 kilograms of cocaine base.
Under amended § 2D1.1(c)(1), Green’s base offense level remains 38.
§ 2D1.1(c)(1). Because Amendment 782 did not lower Green’s applicable
guideline range, he was not eligible for a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2)
and can show no abuse of discretion in the denial of his motion. See United
States v. Henderson, 645 F.3d 709, 712 (5th Cir. 2011). The judgment of the
district court is AFFIRMED.
2