Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Demorris Alexander JAMES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-11-03
Citations: 400 F. App'x 785
Docket Number: No. 10-6774
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Demorris Alexander JAMES, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 400
Pages: 785–786

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Demorris Alexander JAMES, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 10-6774.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 14, 2010.
Decided: Nov. 3, 2010.
Demorris Alexander James, Appellant Pro Se. Sherrie Scott Capotosto, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and AGEE, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Demorris Alexander James appeals the district court's order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion and reducing his sentence from 180 months' to 150 months' imprisonment based on a two-level reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. James, No. 2:05-cr-00161-JBF-JEB-1 (E.D.Va. Jan. 6, 2010); see also Dillon v. United States, — U.S.-,-, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 2693-94, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (clarifying that § 3582(c)(2) does not authorize a resentencing, but rather permits a sentence reduction within the narrow bounds established by the Commission, and concluding that United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), does not apply to § 3582(c)(2) proceedings). 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.