Case ID: f-appx_318/html/0234-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Richard Daniel CROWDER, a/k/a Maleek Simmons, Defendant— Appellant.
    No. 08-7608.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 17, 2009.
    Decided: March 20, 2009.
    Matthew Gridley Pruden, Tin, Fulton, Walker & Owen, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Richard Daniel Crowder appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for a reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) and his motion for reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions. 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). Thus, we affirm the district court’s orders for the reasons stated there. See United States v. Crowder, No. 1:05-cr00201-LHT-1, 2008 WL 3200622 (W.D.N.C. May 28 & Aug. 5, 2008). 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.