United States v. Carr

452 F. App'x 251
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Carr. Read the opinion of the Court — 592 F.3d 636
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided November 3, 2011·No. No. 11-6578·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Steven Donewan Carr appeals the district court’s order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. United States v. Carr, No. 5:98-cr-00246-RLV-2 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 19, 2011); see United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247, 251-52 (4th Cir.2009) (providing that district court, pursuant to § 3582(c)(2), has no authority to reduce sentence below minimum of amended Guidelines range where defendant received within-Guidelines sentence at original sentencing). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Carr, 452 F. App'x 251 (4th Cir. 2011).

452 F. App'x 251 (United States v. Carr) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Dunphy
551 F.3d 247 (Fourth Circuit, 2009)