Court Opinion

ID: 9837965
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-02 21:00:30.316795+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:32.655321
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6646      Doc: 5         Filed: 09/01/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                                No. 23-6646

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        LARRY D. ALEXANDER,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cr-00293-RJC-1)

        Submitted: August 29, 2023                                   Decided: September 1, 2023

        Before KING, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Larry D. Alexander, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6646      Doc: 5         Filed: 09/01/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Larry D. Alexander appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a

        sentence reduction pursuant to section 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No.

        115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222. We review de novo a defendant’s “threshold eligibility for

        First Step Act relief.” United States v. Goodwin, 37 F.4th 948, 952 (4th Cir. 2022).

        Alexander was convicted and sentenced in February 2014, after the enactment of the Fair

        Sentencing Act, and the district court correctly found that he is therefore not eligible for a

        sentence reduction under section 404 of the First Step Act. See id. at 954. 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 this court and argument

        would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                         AFFIRMED

                                                      2