Case ID: f-appx_333/html/0749-01.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. Thomas Lee ASHBY, Jr., Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 09-7019.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Oct. 15, 2009.
    Decided: Oct. 21, 2009.
    Thomas Lee Ashby, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Brian R. Hood, Office of The United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Lee Ashby, Jr., appeals a district court order denying his motion for a sentence reduction filed under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We affirm.

The legal interpretations of the Sentencing Guidelines and the amendments are reviewed de novo. Factual findings are reviewed for clear error. See United States v. Turner, 59 F.3d 481, 483-84 (4th Cir.1995). This court reviews the denial of a motion for a reduction in the sentence under § 3582(c)(2) for abuse of discretion. United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004).

We find the district court did not err in concluding that at sentencing Ashby was held responsible for more than 4.5 kilograms of crack cocaine. Thus, he was not eligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 706. Insofar as Ashby suggests the court could have considered an even greater reduction to his offense level, this claim is foreclosed by United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247, 257 (4th Cir.2009). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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.