US v. Eon David
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. EON DAVID, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (2:95-cr-00206-JAB-3)
June 25, 2009
July 9, 2009
Before TRAXLER, Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eon David, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Eon David appeals the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion for a sentence reduction. David contends the district court erred by considering his
post-sentencing actions, rather than considering the facts as they existed at the time to of his a original sentencing. sentence, In the
district court must consider the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006) and the impact on public safety if the sentence is reduced. U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG) § 1B1.10 The court also may consider the conduct. USSG § 1B1.10 cmt.
cmt. n.1(B)(i), (ii) (2008). defendant's n.1(B)(iii). post-sentencing
Accordingly, the district court's consideration of
David's post-sentencing conduct and the impact on public safety of reducing David's sentence was entirely proper. Accordingly, denying relief. we affirm the district court's order
United States v. David, No. 2:95-cr-00206-JAB-3 In light of this disposition, we deny to expedite the disposition of his
(M.D.N.C. Apr. 6, 2009). as moot David's motion
appeal. legal before
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the materials decisional
contentions the court
process. AFFIRMED 2
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?