United States v. Odom
United States v. Odom
Opinion of the Court
Robert Wilson Odom appeals from the district court’s orders denying his motion for modification of his sentence and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially
AFFIRMED.
To the extent that Odom’s claim under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), was properly before the court pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582 (West 2000), the claim lacks merit: Odom’s 198 month sentence was less than the statutorily authorized maximum penalty. See United States v. Angle, 254 F.3d 514, 518 (4th Cir. 2001) (en banc).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.