US v. Donald Caston
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:06-cr-00190-REP-1. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999684623]. Mailed to: Donald Caston. [15-7012]
Appeal: 15-7012
Doc: 7
Filed: 10/23/2015
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DONALD CASTON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:06-cr-00190-REP-1)
Submitted:
October 20, 2015
Decided:
October 23, 2015
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donald M. Caston, Appellant Pro Se.
Michael Calvin Moore,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-7012
Doc: 7
Filed: 10/23/2015
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Donald Caston appeals the district court’s orders denying
Caston a sentence reduction, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
(2012),
and
denying
as
unauthorized
reconsideration of that order.
find no reversible error.
Caston’s
motion
for
We have reviewed the record and
Further, the district court properly
recognized that it lacked the authority to entertain a motion
for reconsideration in a § 3582(c)(2) proceeding.
See United
States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 235–36 (4th Cir. 2010).
therefore
affirm
district court.
the
orders
for
the
reasons
argument
adequately
by
the
See United States v. Caston, No. 3:06–cr–00190-
REP-1 (E.D Va. May 7, 2015 & June 9, 2015).
oral
stated
We
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
and
materials
legal
before
We dispense with
contentions
this
court
are
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?