United States Ninth Circuit

In an action challenging a sentence, the district court’s order granting in part and denying in part defendant's motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2), based on a retroactive 2014 amendment that lowered her applicable Sentencing Guidelines range, is affirmed where: 1) the government's conduct in this case did not amount to a motion; and 2) defendant's argument, that the canon of constitutional avoidance and the rule of lenity compel interpretation of section 1B1.10(b)(2)(B) as being triggered by a government motion under 18 U.S.C. section 3553(a), is without merit.

Appellate Information

• Published 2016/11/10

Judges

• WALLACE

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel