783 Fed.Appx. 309 (4th Cir. 2019), 19-6332, United States v. May

• Docket Nº: 19-6332
• Citation: 783 Fed.Appx. 309
• Opinion Judge: PER CURIAM:
• Party Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Tobias MAY, Defendant-Appellant.
• Attorney: Juval O. Scott, Federal Public Defender, Roanoke, Virginia, Lisa Marie Lorish, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellant. Thomas T. Cullen, United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, Jennifer R. Bockhorst, Assistant United S...
• Judge Panel: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
• Case Date: November 08, 2019
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Page 309

783 Fed.Appx. 309 (4th Cir. 2019)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

David Tobias MAY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 19-6332

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

November 8, 2019

Submitted: October 31, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

Editorial Note:

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.(See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District Judge. (1:07-cr-00058-JPJ-PMS-1)

Juval O. Scott, Federal Public Defender, Roanoke, Virginia, Lisa Marie Lorish, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellant.

Thomas T. Cullen, United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, Jennifer R. Bockhorst, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

David Tobias May appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012). May pled guilty to drug and firearm offenses pursuant to a Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement. May sought to reduce his sentence under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines, which lowered the offense levels applicable to most drug trafficking offenses by two levels and is retroactively applicable. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10(d), p.s. (2018); supp. app. C, amend. 782. May argues on appeal that the district court failed to understand its obligation to consider all the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012) factors in ruling on his motion to reduce sentence, and failed to consider all his mitigation arguments and adequately explain the denial of relief. We affirm.

Page 310

We review the denial of a § 3582(c)(2) motion for abuse of discretions but "whether a court ruling on a motion to reduce under § 3582(c)(2) must provide an individualized explanation is considered de novo." United States v. Martin, 916 F.3d 389, 395 (4th Cir. 2019). The district court found that May was eligible for a sentence reduction because Amendment 782 lowered May’s Guidelines sentencing range for the drug offenses but declined to impose a lower sentence.^[*] The district court noted its authority to reduce Mays sentence after considering the applicable § 3553(a) factors, public safety concerns, and Mays...