Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Chandar BINGHAM, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-12-22
Citations: 627 F. App'x 211
Docket Number: No. 15-7229
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Chandar BINGHAM, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 627
Pages: 211–212

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Chandar BINGHAM, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-7229.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 17, 2015.
Decided: Dec. 22, 2015.
Chandar Bingham, Appellant Pro Se. Jessica D. Aber, Office of the United States Attorney, Laura Colombell Mar-' shall, Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, Jasmine Hyejung Yoon, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Chandar Bingham appeals the district court's order denying Bingham's 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for sentence reduction based on Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (2014). Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion based on the risk Bingham poses to public safety. See United States v. Smalls, 720 F.3d 193, 195 (4th Cir.2013) ("Whether to reduce a sentence and to what extent is a matter within the court's discretion."). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Bingham, No. 3:01-cr-00270-JRS-3 (E.D.Va. July 24, 2015). 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.