Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LaShawn Demont TINSLEY, a/k/a Eric Peterson, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-05-02
Citations: 570 F. App'x 318
Docket Number: No. 13-6486
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LaShawn Demont TINSLEY, a/k/a Eric Peterson, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 570
Pages: 318–319

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LaShawn Demont TINSLEY, a/k/a Eric Peterson, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-6486.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 24, 2014.
Decided: May 2, 2014.
LaShawn Demont Tinsley, Appellant Pro Se. Jane J. Jackson, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
LaShawn Demont Tinsley appeals the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to recent amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines and the new statutory minimum sentences in the Fair Sentencing Act ("FSA"). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. United States v. Tinsley, No. 5:01-cr00143-BO-l (E.D.N.C. filed Mar. 19 & entered Mar. 20, 2013); see United States v. Black, 737 F.3d 280, 287 (4th Cir.2013) (holding that § 3582(c)(2) does not provide means to apply FSA mín-imums), cert. denied, 2014 WL 956495 (2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.