United States v. Foreman

501 F. App'x 305
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 27, 2012
DocketNo. 12-7404
StatusPublished

This text of 501 F. App'x 305 (United States v. Foreman) 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. Foreman, 501 F. App'x 305 (4th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ronald Cortez Foreman appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a sentence reduction based on Amendment 750 to the crack cocaine Sentencing Guidelines. We review the district court’s decision for abuse of discretion; however, “[w]e review de novo ... a court’s conclusion on the scope of its legal authority under [306]*306§ 3582(c)(2).” United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 186 (4th Cir.2010). As the district court properly found, Foreman was sentenced pursuant to the statutory mandatory minimum term of imprisonment and therefore is not eligible for a reduction via § 3582(c)(2). See id. at 187 (“[A] defendant who was convicted of a crack offense but sentenced pursuant to a mandatory statutory minimum sentence is ineligible for a reduction under § 3582(c)(2).”) (citing United States v. Hood, 556 F.3d 226, 235-36 (4th Cir.2009)). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

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

Related

United States v. Hood
556 F.3d 226 (Fourth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Munn
595 F.3d 183 (Fourth Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
501 F. App'x 305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-foreman-ca4-2012.