US v. Kunta Redd, No. 14-7209 (4th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7209 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KUNTA KENTA REDD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (7:08-cr-00043-D-1) Submitted: November 12, 2015 Decided: December 23, 2015 Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kunta Kenta Redd, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Gordon James, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kunta Kenta Redd appeals from the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion to reduce his sentence. A district court’s decision on whether to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) is reviewed for abuse of discretion, while its conclusion on the scope of its legal authority under that provision is reviewed de novo. United States v. Munn, 595 F.3d 183, 186 (4th Cir. 2010). Our review of the record reveals that the district court did not See United abuse its States Accordingly, we v. discretion Smalls, affirm the 720 in denying F.3d district 193 court’s Redd’s (4th motion. Cir. order. 2013). United States v. Redd, No. 7:08-cr-00043-D-1 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 8, 2014). We deny Redd’s motion to appoint counsel and 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 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.
