Case ID: f-appx_507/html/0314-02.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. Thaddeus JONES, a/k/a Mann, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-7377.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 2, 2013.
    Decided Jan. 25, 2013.
    
      Thaddeus Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Westley Haynie, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Ap-pellee.
    Before KING, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Thaddeus Jones appeals the district court’s orders denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction in his sentence based on Amendment 750 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (2010), and its order denying his motion for reconsideration. We conclude that the district court properly determined that Jones was ineligible for a sentence reduction because his sentencing range was determined by his career offender designation, not the drug quantities attributable to him, and thus was not impacted by Amendment 750. United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 187 (4th Cir.2010). We also conclude that the district court correctly denied Jones’ motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. United States v. Jones, No. 2:10-cr-00090-RAJTEM-1 (E.D.Va. June 13, 2012 & Aug. 1, 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.