Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clarence Edward ALEXANDER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-08-06
Citations: 390 F. App'x 251
Docket Number: No. 10-6557
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clarence Edward ALEXANDER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 390
Pages: 251–252

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clarence Edward ALEXANDER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-6557.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 27, 2010.
Decided: Aug. 6, 2010.
Clarence Edward Alexander, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Clarence Edward Alexander appeals the district court's order denying his motion to reconsider the court's earlier order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a reduction in sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. See United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 234-36 (4th Cir.2010) (holding that district court lacked authority to grant defendant's motion to reconsider, filed eight months after the district court's order ruling on original § 3582(c)(2) motion). 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.