Court Opinion

ID: 8672387
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-25 00:11:35.279416+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:57:21.728774
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
Vera Etta Baker appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for a reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we 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 *14States v. Legree, 205 F.3d 724, 727 (4th Cir.2000). Thus, we affirm the district court’s order for the reasons stated there. 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.