Categories: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions

U.S. v. HAIRSTON, 282 Fed.Appx. 279 (4th Cir. 2008)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Lionel Ray HAIRSTON, Defendant — Appellant.

No. 08-6547.United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.Submitted: June 13, 2008.
Decided: June 27, 2008.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:98-cr-00097-sgw-1).

Lionel Ray Hairston, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Office of the United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Page 280

PER CURIAM:

Lionel Ray Hairston appeals the district court’s order denying his motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000), seeking a reduction to his sentence based on an amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir. 2004) (motion under § 3582(c) “is subject to the discretion of the district court”); United States v. Legree, 205 F.3d 724, 727 (4th Cir. 2000). 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.

jdjungle