United States v. Daryle McNeill

671 F. App'x 67
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 28, 2016
Docket16-7080
StatusUnpublished

This text of 671 F. App'x 67 (United States v. Daryle McNeill) 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. Daryle McNeill, 671 F. App'x 67 (4th Cir. 2016).

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Daryle Lamont McNeill appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 794 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion. See United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 186 (4th Cir. 2010) (providing standard). Under § 3582(c)(2), the district court may modify the term of imprisonment “of a defendant who has been sentenced ;.. based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered,” if the *68 amendment is listed in the Guidelines as retroactively applicable, 18 U.S.C, § 3582(c)(2); see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10 (2016). Section lB1.10(d) of the Guidelines lists the amendments that receive retroactive application, and this list does not include Amendment 794. Therefore, Amendment 794 cannot be given retroactive effect in a § 3582(c)(2) proceeding. See United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247, 249 n.2 (4th Cir. 2009); United States v. McHan, 386 F.3d 620, 622 (4th Cir. 2004).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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. Charles William McHan
386 F.3d 620 (Fourth Circuit, 2004)
United States v. Dunphy
551 F.3d 247 (Fourth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Munn
595 F.3d 183 (Fourth Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
671 F. App'x 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-daryle-mcneill-ca4-2016.