United States v. Rogelio Benitez, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 8520

Rogelio Benitez pleaded guilty under a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement stipulating a 63‑month sentence for possession with intent to distribute cocaine.
The plea agreement and PSR stipulated Benitez was responsible for about 20 kg of cocaine, yielding a base offense level 34, reduced three levels for acceptance of responsibility, for an advisory range of 121–151 months.
The district court adopted the PSR, accepted the 11(c)(1)(C) agreement, and imposed the stipulated 63‑month term.
Benitez moved pro se under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) seeking a sentence reduction based on retroactive Amendment 782 (which lowered certain drug offense levels), arguing his agreed sentence was "based on" the Guidelines and should be reduced.
The district court denied the § 3582(c)(2) motion; Benitez appealed. The court of appeals affirmed.

Issue	Benitez's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether a defendant sentenced to a fixed term under an 11(c)(1)(C) agreement is eligible for a § 3582(c)(2) reduction when Guidelines were considered in plea and PSR	The plea and stipulations (base level, acceptance reduction, no other adjustments) show the 63‑month term was based on the Guidelines, so Amendment 782 should reduce his term	The 11(c)(1)(C) agreement imposed a binding fixed term not tied to any Guidelines range; therefore § 3582(c)(2) (which requires the sentence be "based on" a lowered Guidelines range) does not apply	Court adopted Justice Sotomayor’s Freeman test: because the plea did not tie the stipulated 63 months to a specific Guidelines range (or otherwise base the term on the Guidelines), Benitez is not eligible for a § 3582(c)(2) reduction; affirm

Freeman v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2685 (2011) (plurality and concurring opinions set standards for when an 11(c)(1)(C) fixed term is "based on" the Guidelines for § 3582(c)(2) purposes)
Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817 (2010) (two‑step inquiry for § 3582(c)(2) eligibility and consideration of § 3553(a) factors)
Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 (1977) (method for identifying the holding of fractured Supreme Court decisions)
United States v. Henderson, 636 F.3d 713 (5th Cir. 2011) (standard of review for § 3582(c)(2) motions: abuse of discretion; de novo for guideline interpretation)
United States v. Thornton, 609 F.3d 368 (5th Cir. 2010) (11(c)(1)(C) sentence not "based on" Guidelines where agreement did not tie stipulated sentence to the applicable range)