FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 19 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-10032
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 1:02-cr-00174-HG
v.
MEMORANDUM*
POLOTANI LATU, a.k.a. P, a.k.a. Paul,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
Helen W. Gillmor, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 14, 2016**
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Polotani Latu appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his
motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Latu contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment
782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had
authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v.
Sykes, 658 F.3d 1140, 1144 (9th Cir. 2011). Latu’s 240-month sentence reflects
the mandatory minimum for his offense. See 21 U.S.C. § 848(a). The mandatory
minimum applies in section 3582(c)(2) proceedings. See Sykes, 658 F.3d at 1147-
48. Thus, the district court correctly concluded that it had no authority to reduce
Latu’s sentence below 240 months. See id. at 1148.
To the extent Latu contends that he would not be charged with a crime
carrying a mandatory minimum sentence under current Department of Justice
discretionary policy, his claim is not cognizable in a section 3582(c)(2) proceeding.
See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826 (2010).
AFFIRMED.
2 16-10032