Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Thomas WILLIAMS, a/k/a Ty, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-08-03
Citations: 474 F. App'x 1002
Docket Number: No. 12-6074
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Thomas WILLIAMS, a/k/a Ty, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 1002–1002

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Thomas WILLIAMS, a/k/a Ty, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 12-6074.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 30, 2012.
Decided: Aug. 3, 3012.
Thomas Lee Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Mark C. Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Thomas Lee Williams appeals the district court's orders denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a sentence reduction and motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Williams' § 3582(c)(2) motion for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Williams, No. 4:95-cr-00001-CMC-l (D.S.C. Dec. 5, 2011). Because the district court lacked the authority to consider Williams' motion to reconsider, see United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 235-36 (4th Cir.2010), we affirm the district court's denial of relief. We deny Williams' motion to reconsider the denial of his motion to extend the filing time for his informal brief and 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.