9th Cir.

USA v. Kheyre

May 20, 2026 ·24-7529 ·Per Curiam · By James Taylor

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of a defendant's motion for a sentence reduction under the Sentencing Guidelines. The court held that departures from the original guideline range are not included when calculating the amended guideline range for eligibility purposes.

Background

Abdirahman Kheyre was sentenced to one hundred eighty months in prison for drug distribution offenses. After the Sentencing Commission retroactively amended the Guidelines to reduce the impact of criminal history status points, Kheyre moved for a sentence reduction under Section 3582(c)(2). The district court denied the motion, concluding that the amended guideline range, calculated without the original downward departure, exceeded his actual sentence, making him ineligible for relief.

The court’s reasoning

The panel reviewed the text of USSG Section 1B1.10 and its Application Notes. Applying the standard from Kisor v. Wilkie, the court determined that the term ‘applicable guideline range’ unambiguously does not include departures, as departures are defined as sentences outside the applicable range. Consequently, the district court correctly calculated the amended range without the departure. Since the defendant’s one hundred eighty-month sentence was below this amended range, he was ineligible for a reduction. The court also affirmed that Congress did not violate the nondelegation doctrine or separation of powers by binding courts to the Commission’s policy statements in this context.

What it means going forward

Defendants seeking sentence reductions under Section 3582(c)(2) cannot rely on original downward departures to lower their amended guideline range for eligibility purposes. If a defendant’s sentence is below the amended range calculated without the departure, they remain ineligible for a reduction.