US v. Shontayne Pittman
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SHONTAYNE DWAYNE PITTMAN, a/k/a Wayne, a/k/a Light, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (4:97-cr-00005-F-9)
March 23, 2009
April 9, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Shontayne Dwayne Pittman, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Shontayne Dwayne Pittman appeals the district court's orders denying his motion for reduction of sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006), in which he sought the benefit of Amendments 505 and 706 of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, and denying his motion for reconsideration. find no reversible error. * We have reviewed the record and Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court.
United States v. Pittman,
No. 4:97-cr-00005-F-9 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 2, 2008 & Nov. 18, 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.
We note that Amendment 505 became effective prior to Pittman's initial sentencing in 1997. That Amendment therefore factored into Pittman's original guideline calculation, and his claim that he is entitled to the benefit of that Amendment is moot.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?