U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2009

United States v. Crowder

United States v. Crowder
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided March 20, 2009
318 F. App'x 234

Counsel

Matthew Gridley Pruden, Tin, Fulton, Walker & Owen, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

United States v. Crowder

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

Richard Daniel Crowder appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for a reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) and his motion for reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and find the *235district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions. 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 States v. Legree, 205 F.3d 724, 727 (4th Cir. 2000). Thus, we affirm the district court’s orders for the reasons stated there. See United States v. Crowder, No. 1:05-cr00201-LHT-1, 2008 WL 3200622 (W.D.N.C. May 28 & Aug. 5, 2008). 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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.