United States v. Smith

68 F. App'x 514
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided July 17, 2003·No. No. 03-6600·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Carl Anthony Smith appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. In addition to the reasoning of the district court, see United States v. Smith, No. CR-94-1 (E.D.Va. Apr. 1, 2003), we further find that Amendment 640 to U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(a)(3) is a substantive amendment and that the Sentencing Commission did not intend that it be retroactively applied. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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. Smith, 68 F. App'x 514 (4th Cir. 2003).

68 F. App'x 514 (United States v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Cabrera-Polo
376 F.3d 29 (First Circuit, 2004)