United States v. Rivera

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 26 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-4701 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 3:21-cr-03382-AJB-1 v. MEMORANDUM* JAMES CHARLES RIVERA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Anthony J. Battaglia, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 18, 2025** Before: CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and SUNG, Circuit Judges. James Charles Rivera appeals pro se 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. Rivera contends that the district court incorrectly concluded he was * 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). ineligible for a sentence reduction. He argues that ineligibility under U.S.S.G. § 4C1.1(a)(10)1 is established only when a defendant both received an adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 and engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise, and he did not meet the latter criterion. This argument is foreclosed by United States v. Gonzalez-Loera, 135 F.4th 856, 857 (9th Cir. 2025) (“[W]e hold that [U.S.S.G. § 4C1.1(a)(10)] contains two distinct requirements, and a defendant must satisfy both to obtain relief. Thus, a defendant is ineligible for relief under § 4C1.1 if he either received an adjustment under § 3B1.1 or engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise.”). Because there is no dispute that Rivera received an adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1, the district court correctly determined he was ineligible for a sentence reduction. See Gonzalez-Loera, 135 F.4th at 861. AFFIRMED. 1 The United States Sentencing Commission amended § 4C1.1, effective November 1, 2024, after the district court denied Rivera’s motion. Rivera relies on the version in effect at the time his motion was filed and decided. 2 24-4701