United States v. Arnold Mark Henry , 707 F. App'x 207 ( 2017 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-7012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ARNOLD MARK HENRY, a/k/a B,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:93-cr-00131-HCM-3)
Submitted: December 21, 2017 Decided: December 28, 2017
Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Arnold Mark Henry, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael Comstock, Assistant United States
Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Arnold Mark Henry appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. * United
States v. Henry, No. 2:93-cr-00131-HCM-3 (E.D. Va. July 28, 2017). 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
*
While a district court lacks authority to rule on a successive § 3582(c)(2) motion,
“this prohibition [is] non-jurisdictional, and thus waived when the government failed to
assert it below.” United States v. May, 855 F.3d 271, 274 (4th Cir. 2017). Here, “[b]ecause
the government failed to raise this non-jurisdictional limitation below, it is waived on
appeal.” Id. at 275.
2