ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF SENTENCE UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

LARRY ALAN BURNS, District Judge.

In 2016, this Court sentenced Paulino Carranza Corralez ("Carranza") to the mandatory minimum term of 120 months in custody after he pled guilty to conspiracy to import methamphetamine, cocaine, and heroin into the United States. Carranza's sentence was based on the statutory mandatory minimum for the offense and not on a guideline range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines "(U.S.S.G.").1 He's now filed a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) asking the Court to reduce his sentence.

Section 3582(c)(2) permits a court to reduce a defendant's original sentence when the sentence is "based on" a guideline range that has subsequently been lowered by an amendment to the Guidelines. After Carranza was sentenced, the U.S. Sentencing Commission approved Amendment 782 to the Guidelines, which lowered the sentencing range for most drug offenses by 2 levels. The Commission also voted to make the changes retroactive.

But Amendment 782 has no application to Carranza's original sentence since his sentence resulted from the application of a statutorily-required minimum sentence and was not "based on" the Guidelines. See United States v. Rodriguez-Soriano, 855 F.3d 1040, 1046 (9th Cir. 2017); United States v. Paulk, 569 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir. 2009) (holding that a defendant whose sentence was based on the statutory mandatory minimum rather than on the Sentencing Guidelines was not entitled to a reduction under § 3582(c)(2)).

Carranza is not eligible for a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2) so his motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.