Case ID: f-appx_486/html/0372-02.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. Gregory L. WALKER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-6660.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Oct. 26, 2012.
    Decided: Nov. 1, 2012.
    Gregory L. Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Michael Gordon James, Office Of The United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gregory L. Walker appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2012) motion. Walker raised four claims in the district court but his sole issue on appeal is whether the district court should have retroactively applied the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, — U.S. —, 130 S.Ct. 2577, 177 L.Ed.2d 68 (2010), to analyze the validity of his predicate offenses relied upon for his career offender enhancement. We have recently determined that Carachuri-Rosendo claims may not be raised retroactively in collateral proceedings. See United States v. Powell, 691 F.3d 554 (4th Cir.2012). Accordingly, we affirm. Because we confine our review on appeal to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), and Walker’s informal brief does not challenge the remainder of the district court’s disposition, Walker has forfeited appellate review of the other issues decided in 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.