US v. Demetrius Whitehead


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:10-cr-00213-F-1. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999873262]. Mailed to: Demetrius Whitehead. [16-6297]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-6297 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/29/2016 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6297 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DEMETRIUS DARRELL WHITEHEAD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:10-cr-00213-F-1) Submitted: June 23, 2016 Decided: June 29, 2016 Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Demetrius Darrell Whitehead, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. MayParker, Assistant United States Attorney, Denise Walker, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-6297 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/29/2016 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Demetrius Darrell Whitehead appeals the district court’s order granting his motion for reduction of sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2012), and reducing his sentence from 188 months to 162 months of imprisonment. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant a greater reduction in Whitehead’s sentence. See United States v. Mann, 709 F.3d 301, 304 (4th Cir. 2013) (providing standard of review). reasons stated by the Accordingly, we affirm for the district court. United States v. Whitehead, No. 5:10-cr-00213-F-1 (E.D.N.C. Jan. 27, 2016). We deny we Whitehead’s dispense with contentions are “motion oral for argument adequately abuse of because presented in discretion,” the the facts and and legal 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?