Whether independent review is an obligation for the lower court and the appellate court to maintain control of and to clarify the legal principles in question once the historical facts of the case and law are established to determine whether the facts satisfy the relevant statutory or Constitutional standards when the rule of law as applied to the established facts is violated?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED : Petitioner is challenging all Drugs Minus-Two pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2). Reduction of Sentence, Petitioner is eligible to receive the two-points Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817 130 S. Ct. 2683, Uinted States v. Burrell, 622 F. 3d 961, 962 (8th Cir. 2010). Pepper_v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 1229, 1241, 179 L. Ed 196 (2011). Whether independent review (Which was not) is an obigation for the low Court and the Appeal Court to maintain control of and to clarify the legal principles in question once the historical facts of case and law are established to determine whether the facts satisfy the relevant statutory or Constitutional standards when the rule of law as applied to the established facts is violated? United States v. Henderson, 636 F. 3d 713; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 5993 United States v. Jones, 633 Fed. Appx. 259; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2402 United States v. Larry, 632 F.3d 933; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 2369 . -Alabama v. Bozeman, 533 U.S. 146, 153, (2001) Anderson v. Yungkau, 329 U.S. 482, 485, (1947) . Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826, (2010) Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Berhad Hynes & Larach, 523 U.S. 26, 35, (1988) , In re United States ex rel. Historical Cell Site Data, 724 F.3d 600, 607 (Sth Cir. 2013) United States v. Cooley, 590 F.3d 293, 297, (Sth Cir. 2009) United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235,