Does the First Step Act authorize a court to 'impose' a reduced sentence in accordance with such statutes as 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a) and 3582(a), or does it only authorize a court to 'modify' a sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In 2010, petitioner Michael Dewayne Hegwood was sentenced as a career offender to 200 months in prison for a drug trafficking offense. Under the First Step Act, the district court in 2019 resentenced petitioner as a career offender to 153 months in prison, but stated that the Act did not authorize it to apply recent circuit precedent showing that Mr. Hegwood was not a career offender in light of Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016). On appeal, the Fifth Circuit affirmed holding that the First Step Act only authorized the district court to “modify” the sentence notwithstanding the Act’s language authorizing the district court to “impose” a reduced sentence rather than to “modify” a sentence previously imposed. The questions presented are: 1. Does the First Step Act authorize a court to “impose” a reduced sentence in accordance with such statutes as 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a) and 3582(a), or does it only authorize a court to “modify” a sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)? IL. Does the First Step Act authorize a court to “impose” a reduced sentence using current binding case law that applies to the Act’s change in the sentencing calculations, or does it require a court to “modify” the sentence by applying only the Act’s change in the sentencing calculations while ignoring binding case law that applies to the change? i