Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-09-07963/USCOURTS-ca4-09-07963-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
James Darren Taylor
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7963

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES DARREN TAYLOR,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, 

District Judge. (3:94-cr-00040-FDW-4)

Submitted: February 2, 2010 Decided: February 23, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Darren Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 09-7963 Doc: 8 Filed: 02/23/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

James Darren Taylor appeals the district court’s order 

denying his motion for a reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and 

find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying 

the motion. See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th 

Cir. 2004) (motion under § 3582(c) “is subject to the discretion 

of the district court”); United States v. Legree, 205 F.3d 724, 

727 (4th Cir. 2000). The district court took into account the 

appropriate factors and did not base its decision on an 

erroneous legal or factual premise. See DIRECTV, Inc. v. 

Rawlins, 523 F.3d 318, 323 (4th Cir. 2008) (defining abuse of 

discretion). Thus, we affirm 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

Appeal: 09-7963 Doc: 8 Filed: 02/23/2010 Pg: 2 of 2