US v. Kenni Alonzo, No. 18-6963 (4th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6963 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KENNI RAYMON ALONZO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (2:00-cr-00130-1) Submitted: October 23, 2018 Decided: October 26, 2018 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenni Raymon Alonzo, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kenni Raymon Alonzo appeals the district court’s orders denying his motions to reduce his sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012), and for reconsideration of that denial, Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. * Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Alonzo, No. 2:00-cr-00130-1 (S.D.W. Va. July 5, 2018 & Apr. 5, 2018). 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 * Although a district court lacks authority to reconsider its ruling on an 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion, United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 235-36 (4th Cir. 2010), “this prohibition [is] non-jurisdictional, and thus waived when the government fail[s] to assert it below,” United States v. May, 855 F.3d 271, 274 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 252 (2017). We note that Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) does not apply to a § 3582 criminal motion. See Goodwyn, 596 F.3d at 235 n.*. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
