Filed: Dec. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-7150 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILLIE LOUIS ROSEDERIE SMITH, a/k/a WL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:13-cr-01017-JFA-5) Submitted: December 18, 2018 Decided: December 21, 2018 Before AGEE, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-7150 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILLIE LOUIS ROSEDERIE SMITH, a/k/a WL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:13-cr-01017-JFA-5) Submitted: December 18, 2018 Decided: December 21, 2018 Before AGEE, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-7150
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILLIE LOUIS ROSEDERIE SMITH, a/k/a WL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:13-cr-01017-JFA-5)
Submitted: December 18, 2018 Decided: December 21, 2018
Before AGEE, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Willie Louis Rosederie Smith, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Willie Louis Rosederie Smith appeals the district court’s order denying his motion
for a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012). We review a district
court’s decision whether to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) for abuse of discretion
and its ruling regarding the scope of its legal authority under § 3582(c)(2) de novo.
United States v. Mann,
709 F.3d 301, 304 (4th Cir. 2013). We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. United States v. Smith, No. 3:13-cr-01017-JFA-5 (D.S.C. Sept. 4, 2018). 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