United States v. Severino, 664 F. App'x 116

Eddy Severino pleaded guilty to one count conspiracy to distribute ≥1 kg heroin and one count distribution/possession with intent to distribute ≥1 kg heroin; originally sentenced to 360 months.
After Amendment 782, Severino moved under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for reduction to the bottom of the amended Guidelines (262 months); the district court reduced the sentence to 300 months.
District court relied on two aggravating considerations: (1) prior factual findings that weapons were integral to the drug operation (two‑level § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement affirmed on appeal), and (2) a single 14‑year‑old prison disciplinary sanction for a violent incident.
Severino argued the court erred in treating the offense as involving the “use” of a firearm (invoking Bailey), that reliance on the old disciplinary infraction was improper, and that the 300‑month sentence was substantively unreasonable.
The Second Circuit reviewed for abuse of discretion and affirmed the district court’s partial reduction to 300 months.

Issue	Severino's Argument	Government/District Court Argument	Held
Whether district court erred in finding offense involved the “use” of a firearm	Bailey precludes treating mere possession as "use"; at most possession here	District court relied on prior findings that guns were tools of the trade, supplied to customers and enhanced the narcotics business	No error: district court referenced earlier factual findings and permissibly considered them in § 3582(c) ruling
Whether reliance on a single, 14‑year‑old disciplinary infraction was an abuse of discretion	The solitary, old infraction (no injuries/charges) should not forestall reduction to bottom of range	Weight of § 3553(a) factors is discretionary; the court considered the infraction and still granted a 60‑month reduction	Not an abuse of discretion: considering the infraction was within district court’s discretion
Whether the reduced 300‑month sentence is substantively unreasonable	Age, rehabilitation, good prison record and lack of violent history make 300 months unreasonable	Given offense seriousness and aggravating factors, 300 months is reasonable	Not substantively unreasonable: 300 months falls within permissible range and is supported by record

Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137 (defining “use” of a firearm for § 924(c) purposes)
United States v. Rigas, 583 F.3d 108 (standard for substantive unreasonableness)
United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180 (deference to district court on weight of § 3553(a) factors)
United States v. Verkhoglyad, 516 F.3d 122 (weight of § 3553(a) factors committed to sentencing judge)
United States v. Borden, 564 F.3d 100 (abuse of discretion standard for § 3582(c)(2) rulings)
United States v. Christie, 736 F.3d 191 (discussing appellate review in § 3582(c)(2) proceedings)