NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 22 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-30067
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:02-cr-00108-SEH
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MATHEW DOUGLAS WINCHELL,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 14, 2017**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Mathew Douglas Winchell appeals 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). Appellant’s request for oral
argument is denied.
Winchell contends that the district court abused its discretion by declining to
reduce his sentence under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The
district court acted within its discretion when it denied Winchell a sentence
reduction based on the large quantities of drugs he supplied over a long period of
time, his managerial role in the drug distribution enterprise, and the fact that he
engaged in illegal activity in the presence of children. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt.
n.1(B); United States v. Lightfoot, 626 F.3d 1095-96, 1096 (9th Cir. 2010).
Furthermore, notwithstanding the court’s failure to specifically address Winchell’s
argument concerning his post-offense conduct, the court’s explanation of its denial
was sufficient. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en
banc).
AFFIRMED.
2 16-30067