Legal Opinion

United States v. Christopher Osterloth

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 29, 2017No. 14-30267Unpublished

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Christopher Lee Osterloth appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Osterloth contends that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3582(c)(2), See United States v. Leniear, 574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). The record makes clear that the district court imposed Osterloth’s sentence for reasons unrelated…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. LeniearCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  2. United States v. Antonio Rodriguez-SorianoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API