US v. Andre Green
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:08-cr-00944-MBS-10. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999054475]. Mailed to: Andre Green. [13-6028]
Appeal: 13-6028
Doc: 7
Filed: 03/01/2013
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6028
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ANDRE SHAWN GREEN, a/k/a Andre Greene, a/k/a Dre,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg.
Margaret B. Seymour, Senior
District Judge. (5:08-cr-00944-MBS-10)
Submitted:
February 26, 2013
Decided: March 1, 2013
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Andre Shawn Green, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale, John
David Rowell, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-6028
Doc: 7
Filed: 03/01/2013
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Andre Shawn Green appeals the district court’s order
denying
Green’s
sentence
18
U.S.C.
reduction.
Sentencing
mandatory
Act
On
(“FSA”)
minimum
term
§ 3582(c)(2)
appeal,
should
to
Green
apply
which
he
(2006)
asserts
to
was
motion
for
a
that
the
the
statutory
originally
sentenced
lower
Fair
because his direct appeal was pending at the time the FSA became
effective.
However, as Green was sentenced prior to August 3,
2010, the effective date of the FSA, he is not entitled to
application
of
the
reduced
penalties.
See
United
States
v.
Bullard, 645 F.3d 237, 248-49 (4th Cir.), cert. denied 132 S.
Ct.
356
(2011)
(FSA
does
not
apply
retroactively
to
cases
pending on direct appeal where defendant was sentenced prior to
effective date of the Act).
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
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?