US v. Kareem Thompson, No. 08-7037 (4th Cir. 2009)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7037 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KAREEM R. THOMPSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:98-cr-00207-GRA-1) Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: April 29, 2009 Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kareem R. Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Harold Watson Gowdy, III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kareem R. Thompson appeals the district court s order denying his motion for modification of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). Thompson argues that the district court reduce erred by failing to Amendment 706 of the Guidelines. his sentence based upon See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1(c) (2007 & Supp. 2008); USSG App. C Amend. 706. As we recently observed, Amendment 706 . . . amended § 2D1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines by reducing the offense levels associated with crack cocaine quantities by two levels. United States v. Hood, 556 F.3d 226, 232 (4th Cir. 2009). Thompson s sentence was determined by the career offender guideline, USSG § 4B1.1, and was not based on a sentencing range lowered by the amendment. sentence The fact that the district court reduced Thompson s under Fed. R. Crim. P. applicability of Amendment 706. 35 is irrelevant Id. at 234. affirm the decision of the district court. oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials to the Accordingly, we We dispense with legal before contentions the court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 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.