United States v. Reginald Edwards , 501 F. App'x 305 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 12-7620
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    REGINALD LEON EDWARDS, a/k/a Reginald L. Edwards,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Lynchburg.   Norman K. Moon, Senior
    District Judge. (6:07-cr-00014-NKM-1)
    Submitted:   December 20, 2012            Decided:   December 27, 2012
    Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Reginald Leon Edwards, 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    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
    Reginald      Leon    Edwards      appeals   the   district         court’s
    order denying his 
    18 U.S.C. § 3582
    (c)(2) (2006) motion for a
    sentence reduction based on Amendment 750 to the crack cocaine
    Sentencing Guidelines.           We review the district court’s decision
    for abuse of discretion; however, “[w]e review de novo . . . a
    court’s conclusion on the scope of its legal authority under
    § 3582(c)(2).”      United States v. Munn, 
    595 F.3d 183
    , 186 (4th
    Cir. 2010).      As the district court properly found, Edwards was
    sentenced pursuant to the statutory mandatory minimum term of
    imprisonment and therefore is not eligible for a reduction via
    § 3582(c)(2).      See id. at 187 (“[A] defendant who was convicted
    of   a   crack   offense        but    sentenced   pursuant        to    a    mandatory
    statutory minimum sentence is ineligible for a reduction under
    § 3582(c)(2).”) (citing United States v. Hood, 
    556 F.3d 226
    ,
    235–36 (4th Cir. 2009)).              Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed
    in forma pauperis, and we affirm for the reasons stated by the
    district court.          United States v. Edwards, No. 6:07-cr-00014-
    NKM-1 (W.D. Va. Sept. 11, 2012).
    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: 12-7620

Citation Numbers: 501 F. App'x 305

Filed Date: 12/27/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014