Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-07-06721/USCOURTS-ca4-07-06721-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Joseph A. Crum
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6721

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JOSEPH A. CRUM, a/k/a Unique,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District Judge.

(1:94-cr-00384-BEL)

Submitted: May 29, 2008 Decided: June 3, 2008

Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph A. Crum, Appellant Pro Se. Katharine Jacobs Armentrout,

Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 07-6721 Doc: 31 Filed: 06/03/2008 Pg: 1 of 2
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Joseph A. Crum appeals from the district court’s order

denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. §

3582(c)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. United States v. Crum, No. 1:94-cr-00384-BEL

(D. Md. May 2, 2007). This decision is without prejudice to Crum’s

right to seek resentencing pursuant to Amendment 706 to the

sentencing guidelines, which lowered the base offense level for

drug offenses involving crack cocaine. See U.S. Sentencing

Guidelines Manual (USSG) § 2D1.1 (2007); USSG App. C. Amend. 706.

We have recently held that it is for the district court to first

assess whether and to what extent a criminal defendant’s sentence

may be affected by Amendment 706, either sua sponte or by motion

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2). United States v. Brewer, ___

F.3d ___, 2008 WL 733395 (4th Cir. Mar. 20, 2008). We deny Crum’s

motion for appointment of counsel and 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: 07-6721 Doc: 31 Filed: 06/03/2008 Pg: 2 of 2