United States of America v. Dania Ramos

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-6118
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DANIA RAMOS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina,
at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:11-cr-00075-RJC-4)
Submitted: April 17, 2018 Decided: April 20, 2018
Before WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dania Ramos, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM
Dania Ramos appeals the district court’s order denying her 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
(2012) motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 794 to the Sentencing
Guidelines. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion. See United
States v. Muldrow, 844 F.3d 434, 437 (4th Cir. 2016) (providing standard). Under
§ 3582(c)(2), the district court may modify the term of imprisonment “of a defendant
who has been sentenced . . . based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been
lowered,” if the amendment is listed in the Guidelines as retroactively applicable. 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10(a)(1), (d), p.s.
(2016). The list of retroactively applicable amendments does not include Amendment
794. The district court therefore did not abuse its discretion in denying Ramos’
§ 3582(c)(2) motion.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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 --