Court Opinion

ID: 8449332
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-05 00:29:47.012356+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:48:58.120861
License: Public Domain

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donzel Fredrickus Stinson appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a reduction in his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Stinson, No. 5:06-cr-00022-RLV-CH-20 (Aug. 23, 2012). We deny Stinson’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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.