Case ID: f-appx_670/html/0828-01.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. Carlos REYES, a/k/a Edwardo Ocasio, a/k/a Edwardo Gomez, a/k/a Pedro Reyes-Lopez, a/k/a Pedro Carlos Manuel Reyes-Lopez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-7042
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 17, 2016
    Decided: November 22, 2016
    Carlos Reyes, Appellant Pro Se. John J. Frail, Steven Loew, Monica Kaminski Schwartz, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appel-lee.
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and' TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Carlos Reyes appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012). We have reviewed the record and conclude that Reyes is not eligible for a sentence reduction because Amendment 750 to the Sentencing Guidelines does not lower his Guidelines range. See § 3582(c)(2); U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10, p.s. (2012), USSG App. C Amend. 750 (effective Nov. 1, 2011). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conclusions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED 
      
       To the extent Reyes’ motion challenged the drug amount attributed to him at sentencing, such claim is not properly raised in a § 3582 motion. United States v. Stewart, 595 F.3d 197, 201 (4th Cir. 2010) (noting that § 3582 proceeding is "not considered a full resen-tencing by the court”).