United States v. Joseph Polk
United States v. Joseph Polk
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 24-6732 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/28/2025 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-6732
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOSEPH MATTHEW POLK,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (0:15-cr-00283-JFA-1)
Submitted: January 23, 2025 Decided: January 28, 2025
Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph Matthew Polk, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6732 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/28/2025 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Joseph Matthew Polk appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction. “We review a district court’s decision
[whether] to reduce a sentence under [18 U.S.C.] § 3582(c)(2) for abuse of discretion and
its ruling as to the scope of its legal authority under § 3582(c)(2) de novo.” United States v.
Mann,
709 F.3d 301, 304(4th Cir. 2013). Our review of the record reveals no error. The
court clearly understood its authority to reduce Polk’s sentence, and correctly determined
that Polk was eligible for a reduction based on Amendment 821 to the Sentencing
Guidelines, but the court declined to grant a reduction based on its review of the
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished