US v. Cortney Saylor, No. 17-7563 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7563 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CORTNEY BLAIRE SAYLOR, a/k/a C, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:15-cr-00020-GMG-RWT-25) Submitted: March 29, 2018 Decided: April 3, 2018 Before AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cortney Blaire Saylor, Appellant Pro Se. Shawn Michael Adkins, Paul Thomas Camilletti, Anna Zartler Krasinski, Assistant United States Attorneys, Lara Kay Omps-Botteicher, Martinsburg, West Virginia, Lynette Danae DeMasi-Lemon, Betsy Steinfeld Jividen, Assistant United States Attorneys, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Cortney Blaire Saylor appeals the district court’s order denying her 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motions for a sentence reduction. Any reduction in sentence under § 3582(c)(2) must be based on an amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines. U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10(a)(2), p.s. (2016). Because Saylor does not make any argument on appeal based on any amendment, no reduction in sentence is authorized. * Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of relief. 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 * Because Saylor does not challenge on appeal the district court’s disposition of her claim based on Amendment 794 to the Sentencing Guidelines, she has forfeited appellate review of that issue. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). 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.