United States v. Johnson

318 F. App'x 227
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Johnson. Read the opinion of the Court — 175 F. App'x 631
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 20, 2009·No. Nos. 08-6915, 08-6922·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Wallace Lee Johnson appeals the district court’s order granting in part and denying in part his motions for modification of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). Johnson received the full sentence reduction available under Amendment 706 to the sentencing guidelines. Johnson’s contentions that the court could have considered a sentence below the amended guideline range or that he was entitled to a full sentencing hearing under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), are foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247 (4th Cir.2009). Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 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

United States v. Johnson, 318 F. App'x 227 (4th Cir. 2009).

318 F. App'x 227 (United States v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Dunphy
551 F.3d 247 (Fourth Circuit, 2009)