UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7742
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILLIAM HASKINS, a/k/a Julio, a/k/a K.C.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior
District Judge. (1:95-cr-00072-7)
Submitted: April 16, 2015 Decided: April 20, 2015
Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Haskins, Appellant Pro Se. Miller A. Bushong, III,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Beckley, West Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William Haskins appeals from the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction
of his sentence based on Amendment 750 to the U.S. Sentencing
Guidelines Manual. We affirm.
The district court properly concluded that it lacked
authority to grant a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2)
because Haskins’ Guidelines range was driven by his career
offender designation and not the crack cocaine Guidelines
provisions. See United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 187 (4th
Cir. 2010). To the extent that Haskins challenges the continued
viability of that designation, such a claim is not properly
pursued in a § 3582(c)(2) motion. See Dillon v. United States,
560 U.S. 817 (2010) (explaining that § 3582(c)(2) does not
authorize full resentencing, but permits sentence reduction only
within narrow bounds established by the Sentencing Commission).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See
United States v. Haskins, No. 1:95-cr-00072-7 (S.D.W. Va. Aug.
31, 2012). 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