United States v. Bullock ( 1996 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6274
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
LARRY RANDALL BULLOCK,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District
Judge. (CR-91-66)
Submitted: November 21, 1996 Decided: December 6, 1996
Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bridgett Britt Aguirre, Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Janice McKenzie Cole, United States Attorney, David J.
Cortes, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Larry Randall Bullock appeals from a district court order
denying his Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b) motion for reduction of his
sentence. We dismiss the appeal.
It is uncontested that Bullock's initial sentence was within
the range set by the federal sentencing guidelines. The order deny-
ing Bullock's Rule 35 motion is not appealable. See United States
v. Pridgen, 64 F.3d 147, 149-50 (4th Cir. 1995). Because the dis-
trict court's decision on the Rule 35 motion is not appealable,
Bullock's argument regarding the district court's discrepancy
between its oral pronouncement to grant the motion but reserving
for later decision the amount of departure and the written order
denying the motion is not subject to review by this court.
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.
DISMISSED
2