United States v. Christopher Davis

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7115

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

CHRISTOPHER ANTONIO DAVIS, a/k/a PT,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (1:10-cr-00968-MBS-1)

Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 31, 2015

Before KING and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher Antonio Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale, Julius Ness Richardson, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Christopher Antonio Davis appeals the district court’s

order denying his motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012). We generally review an order

denying a § 3582(c)(2) motion for abuse of discretion. See

United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir. 2004). We

review de novo, however, a district court’s determination of the

scope of its authority under § 3582(c)(2). United States v.

Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247, 250 (4th Cir. 2009). Based on our review

of the record and the relevant legal authorities, we conclude

that the district court did not err in denying Davis’ motion for

a sentence reduction. We therefore affirm the district court’s

order. We deny Davis’ motion for appointment of counsel and

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED