United States v. Ruby Lee Saunders, 323 F. App'x 829 (11th Cir. 2009). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Ruby Lee Saunders, 323 F. App'x 829 (11th Cir. 2009). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Lafleur v. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. (vaed, 2016-06-01)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Lafleur v. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.
E.D. Va. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Powell v. Carey Int'l., Inc., 547 F.Supp.2d 1281, 1286 (S.D.Fla.2008), aff'd, 323 Fed.Appx. 829 (11th Cir.2009); Andrews v. United States, 122 F.3d 1367, 1376 (11th Cir.1997) (citing Riverside v. Rivera, 477 U.S. 561 , 106 S.Ct. 2686 , 91 L.Ed.2d 466 (1986)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Ruby Lee SAUNDERS, Defendant-Appellant
08-15048.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Apr 21, 2009.
323 F. App'x 829
Linda Julin McNamara, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee., James W. Smith, III, Tampa, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
Marcus, Pryor, Anderson.
Unpublished  |  NEW
PER CURIAM:

Ruby Lee Saunders appeals the denial of her motion to reduce her sentence. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Saunders moved to reduce her sentence based on Amendment 706 to the Sentencing Guidelines, which reduced base offense levels applicable to crack cocaine. We affirm.

“We review de novo a district court’s conclusions about the scope of its legal authority under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).” United States v. James, 548 F.3d 983, 984 (11th Cir.2008) (per curiam). A district court may modify a sentence for a defendant who was sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Any reduction must be “consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.” Id. A sentence modification is not consistent with the policy statements when an amendment “does not have the effect of lowering the defendant’s applicable guideline range.” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(2)(B).

Saunders’s argument is foreclosed by precedent. In United States v. Moore, we held that, when a defendant’s base offense level is calculated under the career offender provision, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, Amendment 706 does not lower the defendant’s guideline range and the defendant is ineligible for a sentence modification under section 3582(c)(2). 541 F.3d 1323, 1330 (11th Cir.2008). Saunders was sentenced as a career offender. We affirm the denial of Saunders’s motion to reduce her sentence.

AFFIRMED.