United States v. Dana Fetherson

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 9, 2024
Docket23-7180
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Dana Fetherson (United States v. Dana Fetherson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Dana Fetherson, (4th Cir. 2024).

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7180 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/09/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-7180

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DANA DEAN FETHERSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Kenneth D. Bell, District Judge. (3:21-cr-00045-KDB-DCK-1)

Submitted: December 5, 2024 Decided: December 9, 2024

Before GREGORY and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dana Dean Fetherson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-7180 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/09/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Dana Dean Fetherson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 18

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction based on Amendment 821 to the

Sentencing Guidelines. “We review a district court’s decision [whether] to reduce a

sentence under § 3582(c)(2) for abuse of discretion and its ruling as to the scope of its legal

authority under § 3582(c)(2) de novo.” United States v. Mann, 709 F.3d 301, 304

(4th Cir. 2013). Our review of the record reveals no error. The court clearly understood

its authority to reduce Fetherson’s sentence and appropriately exercised its discretion to

deny a reduction in sentence based on its review of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Fetherson, No. 3:21-cr-

00045-KDB-DCK-1 (W.D.N.C. Nov. 9, 2023). We 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

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

Related

United States v. Robert Mann
709 F.3d 301 (Fourth Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Dana Fetherson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-dana-fetherson-ca4-2024.