Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Owen HARRIOT, a/k/a Lanky, a/k/a Donovan Smith, a/k/a Richard Onyett, a/k/a Bernard Barber, a/k/a James D. Smith, a/k/a Michael Smith, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-09-04
Citations: 539 F. App'x 154
Docket Number: No. 13-7022
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Owen HARRIOT, a/k/a Lanky, a/k/a Donovan Smith, a/k/a Richard Onyett, a/k/a Bernard Barber, a/k/a James D. Smith, a/k/a Michael Smith, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 539
Pages: 154–155

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Owen HARRIOT, a/k/a Lanky, a/k/a Donovan Smith, a/k/a Richard Onyett, a/k/a Bernard Barber, a/k/a James D. Smith, a/k/a Michael Smith, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-7022.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 29, 2013.
Decided: Sept. 4, 2013.
Michael Owen Harriot, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Harriot appeals the district court's order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). The district court denied the motion because the Sentencing Guidelines Amendment 750 did not result in a change to the Guidelines range. We have reviewed the record and find no error. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the material before this court and argument will not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.