UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7127
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KENYA LASHAN MARTIN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge. (5:05-cr-00009-RLV-DCK-16)
Submitted: September 26, 2012 Decided: November 5, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kenya Lashan Martin, Appellant Pro Se. William A. Brafford,
Assistant United States Attorney, Thomas A. O’Malley, Maria
Kathleen Vento, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte,
North Carolina; Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States
Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kenya Lashan Martin appeals the district court’s
denial of her 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction
in her sentence pursuant to Amendment 750 to the U.S. Sentencing
Guidelines Manual (“USSG”). 1 In denying the motion, the district
court stated that “[t]he defendant’s sentence was previously
reduced, in all counts, to 188 months in 2009. After applying
Amendment 750, the reduction results in the same reduced
guideline range.”
Pursuant to USSG § 1B1.10, when a defendant’s
applicable Guidelines range has been lowered by an amendment to
the Guidelines, the district court may reduce the defendant’s
term of imprisonment under § 3582. This court reviews an order
granting or denying a § 3582(c)(2) motion for abuse of
discretion. United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 186 (4th Cir.
2010). A district court abuses its discretion if it relies on
an erroneous factual or legal premise. DIRECTV, Inc. v.
Rawlins, 523 F.3d 318, 323 (4th Cir. 2008).
1
Martin was originally sentenced to 235 months’
imprisonment after pleading guilty to conspiracy to possess with
intent to distribute fifty grams or more of cocaine base, five
kilograms or more of cocaine, and 1000 kilograms or more of
marijuana, and to three counts of possession with intent to
distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1),
846 (2006). In 2008, the district court reduced her sentence to
188 months’ imprisonment pursuant to Amendment 706 to the
Sentencing Guidelines.
2
The original presentence investigation report (“PSR”)
recommended that Martin be held responsible for three kilograms
of cocaine base. At sentencing, however, the district court
found only that Martin was accountable for at least 1.5
kilograms of cocaine base. After the 2008 sentence reduction
pursuant to § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 706 to the Guidelines,
Martin’s base offense level was thirty-six. 2 Under the
Guidelines as amended by Amendment 750, the base offense level
for an offender responsible for 1.5 kilograms of cocaine base is
thirty-four. USSG § 2D1.1(c)(3). Thus, Martin’s sentencing
range has been lowered by Amendment 750 to the Guidelines. The
district court’s conclusion that Amendment 750 does not provide
a basis for considering a further reduction of Martin’s sentence
was therefore erroneous.
Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s order and
remand for reconsideration of the § 3582 motion. 3 We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
2
After application of a two-level enhancement for Martin’s
possession of a dangerous weapon, and a three-level reduction
for acceptance of responsibility, Martin’s total offense level
was thirty-five.
3
By this disposition, we indicate no view as to whether the
district court should further reduce Martin’s sentence, leaving
that discretionary determination to the lower court. We
conclude only that Martin is eligible for a sentence reduction
pursuant to Amendment 750.
3
adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
4