Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jonathan Donnell JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-08-01
Citations: 667 F. App'x 417
Docket Number: No. 15-7710
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jonathan Donnell JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KEENAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 667
Pages: 417–418

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jonathan Donnell JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-7710
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 29, 2016
Decided: August 1, 2016
Jonathan Donnell Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Garolina, for Appellee.
Before KEENAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jonathan Donnell Johnson appeals the district court's orders denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction of sentence and denying his motion for an extension of time to appeal the denial of the § 3582(c)(2) motion. Upon review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Johnson's motion for an extension, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4), 26(b), and find no reversible error with respect to the denial of his § 3582(c)(2) motion. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Johnson, No. 3:00-cr-00136-GCM-3 (W.D.N.C. July 24 & Oct. 7, 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
Because we construe Johnson's motion for an extension as his notice of appeal of the order denying his § 3582(c)(2) motion, both orders are before the court.