Narrative Opinion Summary
Kalonji Skou Ewing appealed the district court's order that denied his motion to reconsider the denial of his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The appeals court affirmed the district court’s decision, stating that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Ewing’s motion for reconsideration, referencing the precedent set in United States v. Goodwyn, which confirmed that district courts do not have the authority to grant motions for reconsideration of rulings on § 3582(c)(2) motions. The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary as the case's facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.
Legal Issues Addressed
Jurisdiction over Sentence Reduction Reconsiderationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court lacks jurisdiction to consider a motion for reconsideration of a sentence reduction denial under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).
Reasoning: The appeals court affirmed the district court’s decision, stating that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Ewing’s motion for reconsideration, referencing the precedent set in United States v. Goodwyn, which confirmed that district courts do not have the authority to grant motions for reconsideration of rulings on § 3582(c)(2) motions.
Necessity of Oral Argumentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary when the facts and legal issues are adequately presented in the court materials.
Reasoning: The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary as the case's facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.