-
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6223 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RODNEY WILSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Danville. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (4:03-cr-70134-NKM-3) Submitted: May 30, 2013 Decided: June 5, 2013 Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rodney Wilson appeals the district court’s orders denying his
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction in his sentence based on Amendment 750 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (2010) and denying reconsideration of that order. We first conclude that the district court properly determined that Wilson was not entitled to a reduction in his sentence as his sentencing range was not impacted by Amendment 750. See United States v. Munn,
595 F.3d 183, 187 (4th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Wilson’s § 3582(c)(2) motion for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Wilson, No. 4:03–cr–70134–NKM-3 (W.D. Va. Dec. 13, 2012). We also conclude that the district court lacked authority to entertain Wilson’s motion for reconsideration. See United States v. Goodwyn,
596 F.3d 233, 235–36 (4th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order denying relief on Wilson’s motion for reconsideration. 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 2
Document Info
Docket Number: 13-6223
Citation Numbers: 523 F. App'x 226
Judges: Diaz, Per Curiam, Shedd, Thacker
Filed Date: 6/5/2013
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 8/6/2023