US v. Shontonio Witherspoon, No. 13-6329 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6329 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SHONTONIO L. WITHERSPOON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior District Judge. (2:08-cr-00844-PMD-1) Submitted: May 23, 2013 Before MOTZ and Circuit Judge. AGEE, Decided: Circuit Judges, and May 29, 2013 HAMILTON, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shontonio L. Witherspoon, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew J. Modica, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Shontonio L. Witherspoon appeals the district court s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to reconsider the criminal judgment however, is entered applicable in only his in case civil in 2010. cases; it Rule is not 60, a mechanism available to reopen or overturn a criminal judgment. See United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 235-36 (4th Cir. 2010) (holding that a district court has no authority to grant a motion to reconsider its previous order denying an 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion). And in any event, it is evident from the record that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Witherspoon s motion. See Aikens v. Ingram, 652 F.3d 496, 501 (4th Cir. 2011). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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.