Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles Edward O'NEIL, a/k/a Charles Edward Oneil, Jr., a/k/a Worm, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-05-31
Citations: 432 F. App'x 199
Docket Number: No. 10-7694
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles Edward O’NEIL, a/k/a Charles Edward Oneil, Jr., a/k/a Worm, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 432
Pages: 199–200

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles Edward O’NEIL, a/k/a Charles Edward Oneil, Jr., a/k/a Worm, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-7694.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 26, 2011.
Decided: May 31, 2011.
Charles Edward O’Neil, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles Edward O'Neil 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 conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. See United States v. Stewart, 595 F.3d 197, 200 (4th Cir.2010). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order for the reasons stated there. See United States v. O'Neil, No. 5:00-cr-00047-RLV-5 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 7, 2010). 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.