Case ID: f-appx_376/html/0298-01.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. James O. JETER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-7102.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 2, 2010.
    Decided: May 4, 2010.
    James O. Jeter, Appellant Pro Se. Olivia N. Hawkins, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appel-lee.
    Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James O. Jeter appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Jeter, No. 3:05-cr-00081-JRS-1 (E.D.Va. April 29, 2009). In addition, we find the basis for the court’s decision is sufficiently clear to permit appellate review. See United States v. Carter, 564 F.3d 325, 328 (4th Cir.2009) (holding, on direct appeal, that sentencing court must demonstrate that it has considered the parties’ arguments and has a reasoned basis for exercising its discretion). Finally, we reject Jeter’s contention that United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), should have been applied to his case; we find that Booker has no relevance to Jeter’s proceeding. 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.