UNITED STATES v. WILLIAMS (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Byron WILLIAMS, aka Felipe, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 20-30075

Decided: February 25, 2021

Before: FERNANDEZ, BYBEE, and BADE, Circuit Judges. Karen Vandergaw, Stephen Corso, Bryan Wilson, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Anchorage, AK, Kelly Cavanaugh, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, Anchorage, AK, for Plaintiff-Appellee Jane Martinez, CJA Law Office of Jane B. Martinez, L.L., Anchorage, AK, for Defendant-Appellant

MEMORANDUM **

Byron Williams appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for a reduction of sentence under the First Step Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Williams contends that the district court erred by failing to give sufficient weight to his post-sentencing rehabilitation efforts. Assuming without deciding that Williams was eligible for a sentence reduction under the First Step Act, the district court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that a reduction was unwarranted in light of Williams's misconduct while in custody and his criminal history. See United States v. Kelley, 962 F.3d 470, 479 (9th Cir. 2020); see also United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”). Moreover, contrary to Williams's contention, the record reflects that the court considered Williams's arguments and provided a sufficient explanation for its decision. See Chavez-Meza v. United States, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 1965, 201 L.Ed.2d 359 (2018).

AFFIRMED.