Opinion
19-7821
08-12-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BERNARD KING, a/k/a Shaborn, Defendant-Appellant.
Bernard King, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Daniel Cooke, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: August 8, 2022
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Senior District Judge. (2:94-cr-00163-RBS-14)
Bernard King, Appellant Pro Se.
Richard Daniel Cooke, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 1
PER CURIAM
Bernard King appeals the district court's order granting his motion for a sentence reduction under § 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222. The court determined that King was eligible for relief and reduced his sentence from life to 420 months' imprisonment. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in resentencing King or plainly err in failing to consider the nonretroactive rule announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Even if King advanced his argument based on Apprendi in the district court, there is no evidence that the court would have reduced King's sentence to 240 months' imprisonment. The court explicitly determined that the 420-month sentence was sufficient and not greater than necessary. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. We deny King's motions for his release and to vacate and remand. 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