From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Majors

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jan 25, 2013
507 F. App'x 310 (4th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 12-7601

01-25-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL MAJORS, Defendant - Appellant.

Michael Majors, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Michael Fitzpatrick, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Lawrence Joseph Leiser, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:09-cr-00192-JCC-1) Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Majors, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Michael Fitzpatrick, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Lawrence Joseph Leiser, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Michael Majors appeals the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction in his sentence based on Amendment 750 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (2010). We conclude that the district court properly determined that Majors was ineligible for a sentence reduction because the sentencing range for his crack cocaine offense was determined by the applicable statutory mandatory minimum, not a calculation of the drug quantity attributable to Majors, and thus was not impacted by Amendment 750. See United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 187 (4th Cir. 2010) ("[A] defendant who was convicted of a crack offense but sentenced pursuant to a mandatory statutory minimum sentence is ineligible for a reduction under § 3582(c)(2)."). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. See United States v. Majors, No. 1:09-cr-00192-JCC-1 (E.D. Va. Sept. 5, 2012). We grant Majors' motion to seal the exhibit he submitted in conjunction with his informal appellate brief. 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


Summaries of

United States v. Majors

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jan 25, 2013
507 F. App'x 310 (4th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Majors

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL MAJORS…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jan 25, 2013

Citations

507 F. App'x 310 (4th Cir. 2013)