The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
13-6227•United States of America v. Antonio Chester Lewis, a/k/a Big Tony
13-6227Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 30, 2013
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6227
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANTONIO CHESTER LEWIS, a/k/a Big Tony,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:05-cr-00107-JAG-1)
Submitted: April 25, 2013 Decided: April 30, 2013
Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Antonio Chester Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Wu,
Assistant United States Attorney, Erik Sean Siebert, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Antonio Chester Lewis 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 Lewis was ineligible for
a sentence reduction because his sentencing range was determined
by his career offender designation, not the drug quantities
attributable to him, and thus was not impacted by Amendment 750.
United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 187 (4th Cir. 2010).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United
States v. Lewis, No. 3:05-cr-00107-JAG-1 (E.D. Va. Jan. 31,
2013). 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.