United States v. Padgett

691 F. App'x 93
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 31, 2017
DocketNo. 17-4013
StatusPublished

This text of 691 F. App'x 93 (United States v. Padgett) 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. Padgett, 691 F. App'x 93 (4th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Chandra Padgett seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Government’s motion in her criminal case. Our review of the district court’s order is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (2012). United States v. Davis, 679 F.3d 190, 193 (4th Cir. 2012). While the statute gives us “jurisdiction to hear challenges to the lawfulness of the method used by the district court in making its sentencing decision,” we lack “jurisdiction to review any part of a discretionary sentencing decision.” Id. at 194. Because the sole issue Padgett raises on appeal challenges the district court’s discretionary sentencing decision, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

DISMISSED

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

Related

United States v. Davis
679 F.3d 190 (Fourth Circuit, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
691 F. App'x 93, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-padgett-ca4-2017.