Case ID: f-appx_671/html/0167-01.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. Alvin B. TRUESDALE, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alvin B. Truesdale, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-6980, No. 16-6154
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: October 28, 2016
    Decided: December 16, 2016
    Alvin Bernard Truesdale, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alvin Truesdale appeals from the district court’s orders granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction of his sentence based on Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual, denying his motion for reconsideration of that order and of the order denying an earlier § 3582(c)(2) motion, and denying his motions for a hearing. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Truesdale, No. 3:92-cr-00034-RLV-1 (W.D.N.C. Jan. 19, 2016 & Jul. 29, 2016). We deny Truesdale’s motions for appointment of counsel and for release on bail pending resolution of these appeal. We further deny as moot his motion to include the district court’s amended judgment in the record on appeal. 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 
      
       To the extent that Truesdale sought reconsideration of the orders addressing his § 3582(c)(2) motions, we note that a district court has no authority to reconsider its decision on a sentence reduction motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 234 (4th Cir. 2010).