United States v. Kenneth Montgomery, Jr.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: May 23, 2016
• Docket: 16-6262
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6262

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

KENNETH M. MONTGOMERY, JR., a/k/a Richard E. Main,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:98-cr-00289-REP-RCY-1)

Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 23, 2016

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth M. Montgomery, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Richard Daniel Cooke, David Thomas Maguire, Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Kenneth M. Montgomery, Jr., appeals from the district

court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion

to reduce his sentence. A district court’s decision on whether

to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) is reviewed for abuse of

discretion, while its conclusion on the scope of its legal

authority under that provision is reviewed de novo. United

States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 186 (4th Cir. 2010). Our review

of the record reveals that the district court did not abuse its

discretion in denying Montgomery relief. See United States v.

Smalls, 720 F.3d 193 (4th Cir. 2013). Accordingly, we affirm

the district court’s order. United States v. Montgomery, No.

3:98-cr-00289-REP-RCY-1 (E.D. Va. Feb. 5, 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