United States v. Frazier

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-8120
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANTOINE MARC FRAZIER, a/k/a Hog,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(4:03-cr-00658-TLW)
Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 1, 2009
Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Antoine Marc Frazier, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker
Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Antoine Marc Frazier appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion for modification of sentence pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). Frazier argues that the
district court erred by failing to reduce his sentence based on
Amendment 706 of the Guidelines. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
Manual (“USSG”) § 2D1.1(c) (2007 & Supp. 2008); USSG App. C
Amend. 706. As we recently observed, “Amendment 706 . . .
amended § 2D1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines by reducing the
offense levels associated with crack cocaine quantities by two
levels.” United States v. Hood, 556 F.3d 226, 232 (4th Cir.
2009). “Because [Frazier’s] 240-month Guidelines sentence was
based on a statutory minimum and USSG § 5G1.1(b), it was not
based on a sentencing range lowered by Amendment 706 . . . .”
Id. at 233. The fact that the district court reduced Frazier’s
sentence for substantial assistance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e)
(2006) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 is irrelevant to the
applicability of Amendment 706. Hood, 556 F.3d at 234.
Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district court. 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.
AFFIRMED
2