Court Opinion

ID: 8478003
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-05 15:47:16.938085+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:49:28.354531
License: Public Domain

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Darren Taylor appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004) (motion under § 3582(c) “is subject to the discretion of the district court”); United States v. Legree, 205 F.3d 724, 727 (4th *475Cir.2000). The district court took into account the appropriate factors and did not base its decision on an erroneous legal or factual premise. See DIRECTV, Inc. v. Rawlins, 523 F.3d 318, 323 (4th Cir.2008) (defining abuse of discretion). Thus, 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 the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.