US v. Tyrone Hall
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cr-00773-JFM-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999729611]. Mailed to: Tyrone Hall FMC ROCHESTER FEDERAL MEDICAL CENTER P. O. Box 4000 Rochester, MN 55903-4000. [15-7140]
Appeal: 15-7140
Doc: 13
Filed: 01/05/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7140
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TYRONE HALL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (1:10-cr-00773-JFM-1)
Submitted:
December 21, 2015
Decided:
January 5, 2016
Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tyrone Hall, Appellant Pro Se.
Albert David Copperthite,
Barbara Slaymaker Sale, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-7140
Doc: 13
Filed: 01/05/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Hall appeals the district court’s order denying his
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction.
Hall sought a reduction based on Amendment 782 to the Sentencing
Guidelines, which reduced the offense levels applicable to drug
offenses.
U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual Suppl. to App’x C,
Am. 782 (2015).
offender
(a
However, because Hall was sentenced as a career
Guidelines
range
from
which
the
district
court
departed downward at sentencing), Amendment 782 did not lower
his
applicable
Guidelines
range,
eligible for a sentence reduction.
district
court’s
judgment.
We
and
he
is
therefore
not
Accordingly, we affirm the
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?