U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2010

United States v. Davis

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided January 27, 2010 · Davis, King, Niemeyer

363 F. App'x 264

Counsel

Alphonso Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

United States v. Leonard Sapp (11th Cir. 2010)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alphonso Davis appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion. On appeal, Davis contends that he should be resen-tenced under Amendment 706 of the Sentencing Guidelines because the district court incorrectly categorized him as a career offender. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“USSG”) § 2Dl.l(c) (2007 & Supp. 2008); USSG App. C Amend. 706; see also USSG § 4B1.1. We note that Davis’ sentence was not determined by his status as a career offender. Rather, he was sentenced to the statutory mandatory minimum term under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) (2006). Therefore, Davis is not eligible for a sentencing reduction under the amendment to the guidelines. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s *265order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the coui't and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

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