United States v. Tanner Larch

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: July 30, 2024
• Docket: 24-6331
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6331 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/30/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6331

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TANNER MOREN EAGLE LARCH,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:18-cr-00146-MR-WCM-1)

Submitted: July 25, 2024 Decided: July 30, 2024

Before GREGORY, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tanner Moren Eagle Larch, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6331 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/30/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Tanner Moren Eagle Larch appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to Part A of Amendment 821 to the

Sentencing Guidelines. The district court concluded that Larch was eligible for relief but

declined to reduce his 92-month sentence based on its assessment of the 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) factors and Larch’s postsentencing conduct. After reviewing the record, we

conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Larch’s motion for a

sentence reduction. See United States v. Spruhan, 989 F.3d 266, 269 (4th Cir. 2021)

(stating standard). Accordingly, we deny Larch’s motion for appointment of counsel

affirm the district court’s judgment. United States v. Larch, No. 1:18-cr-00146-MR-

WCM-1 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 25, 2024). 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