United States v. Ricky Gonzales
670 F. App'x 240
| 5th Cir. | 2016Background
- Ricky Gonzales, a federal prisoner, moved for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines and sought IFP status for his appeal.
- The district court denied his § 3582(c)(2) motion and certified the appeal as not taken in good faith, denying IFP, prompting Gonzales to challenge that certification on appeal.
- Gonzales had been sentenced pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement that stipulated a specific term of imprisonment.
- The plea agreement did not reference a sentencing range, offense level, drug-quantity calculation, or otherwise tie the stipulated sentence to the Guidelines range.
- The issue was whether a § 3582(c)(2) reduction based on Amendment 782 was available where the sentence derived from an 11(c)(1)(C) stipulated term not linked to the Guidelines.
- The district court concluded the stipulated sentence was not based on the applicable Guidelines range, making Gonzales ineligible for a § 3582(c)(2) reduction; the Fifth Circuit affirmed and dismissed the appeal as frivolous.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gonzales was eligible for a § 3582(c)(2) reduction under Amendment 782 despite an 11(c)(1)(C) stipulated sentence | Gonzales: the stipulated sentence did not bar consideration; he remains eligible for a reduction under § 3582(c)(2) | Government/District Court: the sentence was the product of an 11(c)(1)(C) stipulation not tied to the Guidelines, so Amendment 782 did not lower his applicable range | The plea produced a sentence not based on the Guidelines or drug quantity; Amendment 782 did not lower his applicable range, so § 3582(c)(2) relief was unavailable; appeal dismissed as frivolous |
Key Cases Cited
- Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197 (5th Cir. 1997) (IFP appeal good-faith certification standard)
- Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215 (5th Cir. 1983) (good-faith inquiry limited to whether legal points are arguable on their merits)
- United States v. Benitez, 822 F.3d 807 (5th Cir. 2016) (distinguishing sentences tied to Guidelines from 11(c)(1)(C) stipulated terms)
- Freeman v. United States, 564 U.S. 522 (U.S. 2011) (concerning the effect of plea agreements on sentencing and Guidelines applicability)
- United States v. Henderson, 636 F.3d 713 (5th Cir. 2011) (standard for reviewing denials of § 3582(c)(2) relief)