*1 Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

John P. Dewey appeals 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.

Dewey contends that the district court erred by denying his motion without *2 first appointing counsel to represent him. This claim fails because Dewey had no constitutional right to counsel when bringing his section 3582 motion. See United States v. Townsend , 98 F.3d 510, 512-13 (9th Cir. 1996). Moreover, because Dewey was sentenced as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, the district court correctly determined that he is ineligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); United States v. Wesson , 583 F.3d 728, 731 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2 16-30113

[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Dewey’s request for oral argument is denied.