United States v. Dexter Dixon

553 F. App'x 304
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 28, 2014
Docket13-7875
StatusUnpublished

This text of 553 F. App'x 304 (United States v. Dexter Dixon) 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. Dexter Dixon, 553 F. App'x 304 (4th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dexter Antonio Dixon appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to compel the Government to file- a motion for sentence reduction under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b). We affirm.

It is well-settled that whether to file a Rule 35(b) motion is a matter left to the Government’s discretion. Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b); United States v. Dixon, 998 F.2d 228, 230 (4th Cir.1993). Here, the Government found Dixon’s assistance insufficient to merit such a motion, and Dixon has failed to show that the Government obligated itself to move for the reduction as he asserts or that the Government’s refusal to move for the reduction was based on an unconstitutional motive. Wade v. United States, 504 U.S. 181, 185-86, 112 S.Ct. 1840, 118 L.Ed.2d 524 (1992).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order denying Dixon’s motion to compel. 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

Wade v. United States
504 U.S. 181 (Supreme Court, 1992)
United States v. Willie James Dixon
998 F.2d 228 (Fourth Circuit, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
553 F. App'x 304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-dexter-dixon-ca4-2014.