UNITED STATES v. WHITLEY (2021)

Sean Fontae Whitley appeals the district court's order denying, in part, Whitley's motion for a sentence reduction under the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 519, because the court deemed a reduction in Whitley's prison term to be “not appropriate.”^* On appeal, Whitley conceded that, if the district court was merely exercising its discretion to refuse to reduce Whitley's sentence, then it committed no error. Whitley thus asked that this court vacate the district court's order and remand the matter so the district court could clarify whether it was aware it had discretion to reduce Whitley's sentence. We soon thereafter granted the Government's unopposed motion to remand the matter for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to clarify its order.

The district court has clarified its order, explaining that it fully understood the scope of its authority in refusing to reduce Whitley's sentence. We thus affirm the district court's order. See United States v. Whitley, No. 5:04-cr-00166-H-1 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 6, 2019). We deny as moot the Government's motion for summary disposition. 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

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   The district court granted Whitley's motion, in part, and reduced Whitley's term of supervised release.

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.