US v. Kavin Williams


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:10-cr-00088-D-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000032085]. Mailed to: Kavin Datron Williams FCI BUTNER MEDIUM I FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 1000 Butner, NC 27509-0000. [16-7457]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7457 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/28/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7457 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KAVIN DATRON WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (4:10-cr-00088-D-1) Submitted: February 23, 2017 Decided: February 28, 2017 Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kavin Datron Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Shailika S. Kotiya, William Glenn Perry, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7457 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/28/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Kavin Datron Williams appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction. Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion based on the risk Williams poses to public safety. United States v. Smalls, 720 F.3d 193, 195 (4th Cir. See 2013) (“Whether to reduce a sentence and to what extent is a matter within the district court’s discretion.”) Accordingly, affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. States v. 2016). legal before Williams, No. 4:10-cr-00088-D-1 we See United (E.D.N.C. Oct. 7, We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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?