UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7589
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
HENRY CHESTER, a/k/a Zeke,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (4:94-cr-00665-CMC-1)
Submitted: January 18, 2011 Decided: January 28, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Henry Chester, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea,
Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Henry Chester appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 3742(a) (2006). Initially, the district court noted
that § 3742(a) provides no authority for it to reduce a term of
imprisonment. The district court went on to hold that, even if
Chester’s motion had been brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2006), he would not be entitled to relief. For
the reasons set forth below, we affirm.
Chester sought relief under Amendment 674 to the U.S.
Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“USSG”). Under § 3582(c)(2), a
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). Chester was sentenced in 1995. Amendment 674 did
not become effective until November 1, 2004, and does not apply
retroactively. See USSG Supp. App. C, Amend. 674 (2010); USSG
§ 1B1.10(c), p.s. (2010).
Because Chester clearly is not entitled to a reduction
based on Amendment 674, we affirm the district court’s orders.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3