Case: 12-13336 Date Filed: 06/18/2013 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
__________________________
No. 12-13336
__________________________
D.C. Docket No. 6:11-cr-00353-CEH-GJK-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOHN C. PATTERSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
__________________________
(June 18, 2013)
Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, JORDAN and COX, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
John C. Patterson challenges on appeal the district court’s denial of his
motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Specifically, he
argues that although he qualified as a career offender, he was not sentenced as a
career offender, and thus he is eligible for a sentencing reduction under
Case: 12-13336 Date Filed: 06/18/2013 Page: 2 of 2
Amendment 750 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. We find his
argument unpersuasive because the application of Amendment 750 would not
lower his sentencing range.
Patterson also contends that Freeman v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2685
(2011), abrogated our decision in United States v. Moore, 541 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir.
2008). As Patterson concedes, however, this argument is foreclosed by our
decision in United States v. Lawson, 686 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 133 S.
Ct. 568 (2012).
AFFIRMED.
2