UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6754
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
EON DAVID,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Chief District Judge. (2:95-cr-00206-JAB-3)
Submitted: June 25, 2009 Decided: July 9, 2009
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and MICHAEL and KING, Circuit
Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eon David, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant United
States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Eon David appeals the district court’s order denying
his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion for a sentence reduction.
David contends the district court erred by considering his
post-sentencing actions, rather than considering the facts as
they existed at the time of his original sentencing. In
determining whether to reduce a defendant’s sentence, the
district court must consider the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) (2006) and the impact on public safety if the sentence
is reduced. U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG) § 1B1.10
cmt. n.1(B)(i), (ii) (2008). The court also may consider the
defendant’s post-sentencing conduct. USSG § 1B1.10 cmt.
n.1(B)(iii). Accordingly, the district court’s consideration of
David’s post-sentencing conduct and the impact on public safety
of reducing David’s sentence was entirely proper.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order
denying relief. United States v. David, No. 2:95-cr-00206-JAB-3
(M.D.N.C. Apr. 6, 2009). In light of this disposition, we deny
as moot David’s motion to expedite the disposition of his
appeal. 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