UNITED STATES v. STRONG (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

William Strong appeals from the district court’s denial of his amended motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a sentence reduction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Strong contends that he is eligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Guidelines because recent California state court orders, which reclassified his previous drug felony convictions as misdemeanors, have affected his designation as a career offender. We review de novo whether the district court had authority to reduce a defendant’s sentence under section 3582. See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009).

Strong’s challenge to his career offender designation is not cognizable under section 3582(c)(2), which authorizes sentencing reductions solely where the defendant’s Guidelines range has been lowered by an amendment to the Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(1), (b)(1); Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 831, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010). The district court properly concluded that Strong was ineligible for a reduction because Amendment 782 did not affect his status as a career offender, and therefore did not lower his Guidelines range. See United States v. Wesson, 583 F.3d 728, 731 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.