UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6784
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
BRIAN TAFT EDDIE,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,
District Judge. (3:01-cr-00004-FDW-3)
Submitted: August 20, 2009 Decided: August 27, 2009
Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brian Taft Eddie, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Scott Broyles, Amy
Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charlotte,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Brian Taft Eddie appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2006). Eddie contends that he was entitled to a
reduction under Amendment 706 of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
Manual (“USSG”), which lowered the base offense levels for drug
offenses involving cocaine base. See USSG § 2D1.1(c) (2007
& Supp. 2008); USSG App C. Amend. 706. Because Eddie was
sentenced on the basis of his status as a career offender, we
find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in
denying Eddie’s motion. See United States v. Sharkey, 543 F.3d
1236, 1238-39 (10th Cir. 2008); United States v. Moore, 541 F.3d
1323, 1330 (11th Cir. 2008); United States v. Thomas, 524 F.3d
889, 889-90 (8th Cir. 2008).
Accordingly, we deny Eddie’s motion to appoint counsel
and affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Eddie,
No. 3:01-cr-00004-FDW-3 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 16, 2009). 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