US v. Ronnie Rainey

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus [1000188319-2] in 17-7365. Originating case number: 5:10-cr-00199-D-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [1000280060]. Mailed to: Ronnie D. Rainey. [17-7365, 17-7561]

Appeal: 17-7365

Doc: 11

Filed: 04/23/2018

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7365

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RONNIE D. RAINEY,
Defendant - Appellant.

No. 17-7561

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RONNIE D. RAINEY,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina,
at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:10-cr-00199-D-1)

Submitted: April 19, 2018

Decided: April 23, 2018

Appeal: 17-7365

Doc: 11

Filed: 04/23/2018

Pg: 2 of 3

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

No. 17-7365, dismissed; No. 17-7561, affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronnie D. Rainey, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 17-7365

Doc: 11

Filed: 04/23/2018

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Ronnie D. Rainey challenges (1) the district court’s
order denying motions from nonparties to have their names removed from the amended
criminal judgment (Appeal No. 17-7365); and (2) the order denying Rainey’s motion for
clarification of the sentence (Appeal No. 17-7561). Rainey lacks standing to appeal the
district court’s denial of relief for nonparties, Smith v. Frye, 488 F.3d 263, 272 (4th Cir.
2007) (finding a litigant “cannot rest his claim to relief on the legal rights or interests of
third parties” (internal quotation marks omitted)), and we therefore dismiss the appeal as
to No. 17-7365. We affirm the district court’s denial of the motion for clarification, as
the district court did not err in declining to revisit the sentence imposed, see 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(b) (2012); United States v. Oliver, 878 F.3d 120, 125 (4th Cir. 2017) (“A criminal
conviction becomes final at the end of the appellate process . . . .”). We also deny
Rainey’s request for a writ of mandamus directing the district court to clarify the
sentence. 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.
No. 17-7365, DISMISSED;
No. 17-7561, AFFIRMED

3