Case: 12-12878 Date Filed: 05/20/2013 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-12878
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:03-cr-00273-SDM-MAP-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL DAVID MCDONALD,
a.k.a. James Richard Brown,
a.k.a. Michael David Taylor,
a.k.a. Michael Palmer,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(May 20, 2013)
Before CARNES, BARKETT and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 12-12878 Date Filed: 05/20/2013 Page: 2 of 2
Michael McDonald appeals pro se the denial of his renewed motion to
reduce his sentence based on Amendment 750 to the Sentencing Guidelines.
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The district court denied McDonald’s first motion to
reduce on the ground that he was a career offender and ineligible for a reduction of
his sentence, see United States v. Lawson, 686 F.3d 1317, 1321 (11th Cir. 2012),
and McDonald did not appeal that decision. The decision that the district court
lacked authority to reduce McDonald’s sentence is the law of the case, see United
States v. Escobar-Urrego, 110 F.3d 1556, 1560 (11th Cir. 1997), and McDonald
does not challenge that binding decision. The district court did not abuse its
discretion by denying McDonald’s renewed motion to reduce, which duplicated the
argument made in McDonald’s first motion.
We AFFIRM the denial of McDonald’s second motion to reduce.
2