ORDER

J. RANDAL HALL, District Judge.

On March 19, 2014, Defendant Oscar Piedra pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 5 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. He was sentenced to serve 108 months imprisonment, which was later reduced to 87 months pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2) after his guideline range was lowered.

Presently, Defendant has filed a motion to further reduce his sentence "pursuant [to] U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 (Minor Role)." Presumably, Defendant is referencing Amendment 794 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which sets out new guidelines for the determination of whether a defendant should be granted a mitigating role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2.

Defendant was sentenced prior to the effective date of Amendment 794. Even assuming Defendant is correct, i.e., that his conduct would qualify him for a "minor role" reduction, a court may not modify a sentence once it has been imposed except under limited circumstances. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). And, while one of the exceptions provides that a sentence may be reduced if it is based on a lowered guideline range, § 3582(c)(2) is only triggered by an amendment listed in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(d). ("In determining whether, and to what extent, a reduction in the defendant's term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) . . . is warranted, . . . the court shall substitute only the amendments listed in subsection (d) . . . and shall leave all other guideline application decisions unaffected" (emphasis added).). Amendment 794 is not a listed amendment in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(d).1 Consequently, Amendment 794 would not be available to Defendant.

Upon the foregoing, Defendant's motion to reduce sentence (doc. 31) is DENIED.

ORDER ENTERED.