Case ID: f-appx_506/html/0210-01.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. Carlton A. EDWARDS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-7887.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 17, 2013.
    Decided: Jan. 23, 2013.
    Carlton A. Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Jamie L. Mickelson, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

The Court amends its opinion filed January 23, 2013 as follows:

On the cover sheet, district court information section — the district court docket number is corrected.

Carlton A. Edwards appeals the district court’s order denying his motion seeking to compel the Government to file a motion for reduction of sentence in his case. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Wade v. United States, 504 U.S. 181, 185-87, 112 S.Ct. 1840, 118 L.Ed.2d 524 (1992) (describing the scope of the prosecution’s discretion in filing such a motion); United States v. Butler, 272 F.3d 683, 686-87 (4th Cir.2001) (same); see also United States v. LeRose, 219 F.3d 335, 341-43 (4th Cir.2000) (evidentiary hearing not required unless defendant makes a “ ‘substantial threshold showing1 ” that the prosecution’s refusal to file the requested motion resulted from improper or suspect motives (quoting Wade, 504 U.S. at 186, 112 S.Ct. 1840)). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.