Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Duvell Mozart EVERETT, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-09-17
Citations: 478 F. App'x 773
Docket Number: No. 12-6707
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Duvell Mozart EVERETT, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DUNCAN and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 478
Pages: 773–774

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Duvell Mozart EVERETT, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-6707.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 10, 2012.
Decided: Sept. 17, 2012.
Duvell Mozart Everett, Appellant Pro Se. Norval George Metcalf, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before DUNCAN 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Duvell Mozart Everett appeals the district court's order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a sentence reduction. We review an order granting or denying a § 3582 motion for a sentence reduction for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 186 (4th Cir.2010) (citing United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004)). "A district court abuses its discretion if it. bases its exercise of discretion on an erroneous factual or legal premise." DIRECTV, Inc. v. Rawlins, 523 F.3d 318, 323 (4th Cir.2008) (citing James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d 233, 239 (4th Cir.1993)). We have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting Everett's arguments for a reduction greater than that awarded. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. 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 in the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.