Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8508628
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Diaz-Aspina
No. 8508628 · Decided October 5, 2010
No. 8508628·Ninth Circuit · 2010·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
October 5, 2010
Citation
No. 8508628
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Jaime Diaz-Aspina appeals from the district court’s order denying his second 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) motion to modify his sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Following the district court’s grant of his first motion to modify his sentence in 1996, reducing his sentence from 310 months to 293 months, Diaz-Aspina now contends, pursuant to United States v. Boolcer, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and United States v. Hicks, 472 F.3d 1167 (9th Cir.2006), that he is entitled to a full resentencing proceeding so that the district court may consider a further sentence reduction. This contention is foreclosed. See Dillon v. United States, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 2692-93 , 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (concluding that neither the constitutional nor the remedial aspects of Booker apply to a resentencing proceeding under § 3582(c)(2)). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Jaime Diaz-Aspina appeals from the district court’s order denying his second 18 U.S.C.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Jaime Diaz-Aspina appeals from the district court’s order denying his second 18 U.S.C.
02Following the district court’s grant of his first motion to modify his sentence in 1996, reducing his sentence from 310 months to 293 months, Diaz-Aspina now contends, pursuant to United States v.
03Hicks, 472 F.3d 1167 (9th Cir.2006), that he is entitled to a full resentencing proceeding so that the district court may consider a further sentence reduction.
042683, 2692-93 , 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (concluding that neither the constitutional nor the remedial aspects of Booker apply to a resentencing proceeding under § 3582(c)(2)).
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Jaime Diaz-Aspina appeals from the district court’s order denying his second 18 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Diaz-Aspina in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on October 5, 2010.
Use the citation No. 8508628 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.