UNITED STATES v. LOPEZ (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

Lester Leonard Lopez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the sentence of 10 months and 33 days imposed upon revocation of probation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Lopez challenges the 33-day official detention adjustment applied by the district court pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(e). His arguments lack merit. Contrary to Lopez’s contention, section 7B1.3(e) is not in conflict with 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b). The former is a Guidelines policy statement that the district court is required to consider in imposing a revocation sentence, see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(4)(B), while the latter is a directive to the Attorney General that does not apply at sentencing. See United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329, 333-34, 112 S.Ct. 1351, 117 L.Ed.2d 593 (1992). Moreover, section 7B1.3(e) does not violate the Equal Protection Clause because revoked probationers are not similarly situated to defendants being sentenced for their underlying conviction for the first time. See Mayner v. Callahan, 873 F.2d 1300, 1301 (9th Cir. 1989) (“The equal protection clause directs that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike.”) (internal quotations omitted).

AFFIRMED.