Case ID: f-appx_34/html/0111-02.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. Nathaniel WATKINS, a/k/a J.R., a/k/a Peanut, a/k/a Nut, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-6400.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 25, 2002.
    Decided May 8, 2002.
    
      Nathaniel Watkins, Appellant Pro Se. Michael R. Smythers, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Nathaniel Watkins seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c)(2) (West 2000), which the court construed as being filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001), and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Although the district court construed Watkins’ claim that his base offense level should be reduced to thirty-eight in accordance with Amendment 505 to the sentencing guidelines as being filed under § 2255, the claim was properly brought under § 3582(c)(2). We find that any error in construing that claim is harmless because, applying the Amendment to Watkins’ ease, he is not entitled to relief. We also find that the district court properly denied Watkins’ remaining claims as being successive. Finally, with regard to the denial of his motion for reconsideration, Watkins failed to challenge that order in his informal brief and, therefore, has waived appellate review under 4th Cir. R. 34(b).

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Watkins, Nos. CR-90-260-A; CA-93-1035-AM (E.D. Va. Jan. 4, 2002; Feb. 11, 2002). 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.

DISMISSED.