United States v. Jermal Daniels
This text of 683 F. App'x 227 (United States v. Jermal Daniels) 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.
Opinion
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Jermal Daniels appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant a reduction in Daniels’ sentence. See United States v. Mann, 709 F.3d 301, 304 (4th Cir. 2013) (providing review standard); see also Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 825-27, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (explaining that § 3582(c)(2) proceeding is not full re-sentencing); United States v. Smalls, 720 F.3d 193, 195-96 (4th Cir. 2013) (recognizing that district court is presumed, absent contrary indication, to have considered relevant factors when ruling on § 3582(c)(2) motion). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Daniels, No. 3:05-cr-00103-RJC-DCK-2 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 13, 2016). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
683 F. App'x 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jermal-daniels-ca4-2017.