Case ID: f-appx_703/html/0203-02.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. Victor ROMAN, a/k/a Chaparro, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 17-6898
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 16, 2017
    Decided: November 21, 2017
    Victor Roman, Appellant Pro Se. Edward D. Gray, Assistant United States Attorney, Laura Howard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh,’ North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and TRAXLER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. ■
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Victor Roman appeals the district court’s marginal order denying his motion for reconsideration of the district court’s previous denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its order denying the § 3582(c)(2) motion, United States v. Roman, No. 7:05-cr-00097-FL-20 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 25, 2015). 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 
      
       While a district court lacks authority to reconsider a ruling on a § 3582(c)(2) motion, "this prohibition [is] non-jurisdictional, and thus waived when the government fail[s] to assert it below.” United States v. May, 855 F.3d 271, 274 (4th Cir. 2017). Here, “[b]ecause the government failed to raise this non-jurisdictional limitation below, it is waived on appeal,” Id. at 275,