*1 Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: [*]
Clinton Rodriguez appeals the district court’s refusal to grant a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Rodriguez argues that he was eligible for a sentence reduction and should have received one even though his initial sentence was twice reduced for his substantial assistance to authorities.
The district court correctly recognized that Rodriguez was eligible for a reduction, but it declined to award one, noting that Rodriguez’s current 150- *2 Case: 16-30626 Document: 00513801322 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/16/2016
No. 16-30626
month sentence was already well below the 240-month statutory minimum sentence he originally faced. The district court’s decision is reviewed for an abuse of discretion, and it was not required to reduce the sentence simply because Rodriguez is eligible. See United States v. Cooley , 590 F.3d 293, 297 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Evans , 587 F.3d 667, 672 (5th Cir. 2009). The court considered the relevant factors and did not abuse its discretion by declining to award any further reduction. See Cooley , 590 F.3d at 297.
The judgment is AFFIRMED.
2
[*] Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.