Court Opinion

ID: 8480854
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-05 18:56:21.297208+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:49:31.393975
License: Public Domain

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Chauncey Floyd appeals a district court order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). The district court found Floyd was not eligible for a reduction under the recent amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines because his sentence was based, not on a quantity of crack cocaine, but on his career offender status. We find the district did not abuse its discretion denying Floyd’s motion for a sentence reduction. United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004) (stating standard of review). 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 the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.