United States of America v. Maurice Lavonta Williams

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6142
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MAURICE LAVONTA WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith,
Chief District Judge. (4:03-cr-00128-RBS-TEM-1)
Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 21, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Maurice Lavonta Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Scott W. Putney,
Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Maurice Lavonta Williams appeals the district court’s
order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a
sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and conclude
that Williams was not eligible for a sentence reduction because
Amendment 750 to the Sentencing Guidelines did not lower the
Guidelines range established in a prior § 3582 proceeding. With
regard to Williams’ claim on appeal that the district court
should have permitted him to file a formal § 3582 motion, we
conclude that the district court did not abuse its wide
discretion in issues of case management. Cf. United States v.
Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 192 (4th Cir. 2007). Finally, to the
extent Williams reasserts the remaining arguments he raised in
the district court, those arguments are foreclosed by United
States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247, 252-57 (4th Cir. 2009), and
Dillon v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2683, 2690-93 (2010).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order denying relief
under § 3582(c)(2). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --