United States v. Rolle

163 F. App'x 245
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 25, 2006·No. No. 05-7554·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Troy Rolle appeals the district court’s oral order denying his motion to modify his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000). Rolle sought relief based on the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). The relief Rolle seeks is unavailable under § 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 473 (4th Cir.2004) (noting that § 3582(c)(2) au[246]*246thorizes a “district court to reduce the sentence imposed on a defendant who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 994(o)”); see also United States v. Moreno, 421 F.3d 1217, 1220 (11th Cir.2005) (holding that “Booker is inapplicable to § 3582(c)(2) motions”). Accordingly, we affirm. 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. Rolle, 163 F. App'x 245 (4th Cir. 2006).

163 F. App'x 245 (United States v. Rolle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Horn
590 F. Supp. 2d 976 (M.D. Tennessee, 2008)