Opinion
No. 17-7155
10-20-2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. YULIAN CARRILLO-TAMAYO, Defendant - Appellant.
Yulian Carrillo-Tamayo, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale, Jane Barrett Taylor, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (5:12-cr-00563-MBS-2) Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Yulian Carrillo-Tamayo, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale, Jane Barrett Taylor, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Yulian Carrillo-Tamayo (Tamayo) appeals from the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion seeking a sentence reduction under Amendments 750, 759, and 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court's rulings. The mandate rule forecloses Tamayo's challenge to the district court's denial of § 3582(c)(2) relief under Amendment 782. See Doe v. Chao, 511 F.3d 461, 464-65 (4th Cir. 2007) (discussing the rule). We therefore affirm this ruling. We also affirm the district court's denial of § 3582(c)(2) relief under Amendments 750 and 759 for the reasons stated by that court. United States v. Carrillo-Tamayo, No. 5:12-cr-00563-MBS-2 (D.S.C. Aug. 22, 2017). 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