United States v. Joseph Prysock ( 2012 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6506
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOSEPH PRYSOCK, a/k/a JoJo,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, Chief District
Judge. (1:06-cr-00676-MBS-1)
Submitted: June 7, 2012 Decided: July 13, 2012
Before KING, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph Prysock, Appellant Pro Se. Jimmie Ewing, Mark C. Moore,
Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Joseph Prysock appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction
of sentence. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. United States v. Prysock, No. 1:06-cr-00676-
MBS-1 (D.S.C. Feb. 17, 2012). We deny as unnecessary Prysock’s
motion for a certificate of appealability and 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
*
Although Prysock argues on appeal that the district court
erred in denying his post-conviction motion filed pursuant to 28
U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011), we have no authority to
entertain this claim. Prysock’s notice of appeal specifically
sought review of the district court’s order denying his
§ 3582(c)(2) motion and, in any event, was not timely as to the
lower court’s earlier ruling denying Prysock’s § 2255 motion.
Thus, we lack jurisdiction to consider Prysock’s challenge to
the denial of § 2255 relief.
2