US v. Donald Lewi


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:12-cr-00068-FL-2. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999990665]. Mailed to: Appellant. [16-7113]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7113 Doc: 7 Filed: 12/20/2016 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7113 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DONALD ELBERT LEWIS, a/k/a Peptone, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (4:12-cr-00068-FL-2) Submitted: December 15, 2016 Decided: December 20, 2016 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald Elbert Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7113 Doc: 7 Filed: 12/20/2016 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Donald Elbert Lewis appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of the court’s November 2015 order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction of his sentence based on Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual. find no reversible error. court’s order. We have reviewed the record and Accordingly, we affirm the district See United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 234 (4th Cir. 2010) (a district court has no authority to reconsider its decision on § 3582(c)(2)). a sentence reduction motion under 18 U.S.C. 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?