FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MAY 11 2017
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-10390
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:14-cr-01186-JGZ
v.
MEMORANDUM*
THOMAS ROMERO RUIZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 8, 2017**
Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Thomas Romero Ruiz 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).
Ruiz contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment
782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court has
authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2). See United States v.
Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). The record reflects that Amendment
782 was in effect at the time that Ruiz was sentenced and he was sentenced under
the amended Guidelines. Therefore, the district court correctly determined that
Ruiz was not eligible for a sentence reduction, see 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2);
Leniear, 574 F.3d at 673-74, and Ruiz’s equal protection rights were not violated.
Ruiz’s argument that he should have received an adjustment for acceptance
of responsibility at his original sentencing is not cognizable in a section 3582(c)(2)
proceeding. See Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 831 (2010) (alleged errors
at the original sentencing are “outside the scope of the proceeding authorized by
§ 3582(c)(2)”).
AFFIRMED.
2 16-10390