US v. Nathan Foster, No. 12-7380 (4th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7380 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. NATHAN LEE FOSTER, a/k/a Plum, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:03-cr-00319-F-1) Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 16, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed in part, affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathan Lee Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Nathan Lee Foster appeals the district court s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a sentence reduction and his successive and unauthorized 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant s brief. 34(b). See 4th Cir. R. Because Foster does not challenge the basis for the district court s forfeited disposition appellate review of of his that § 2255 motion, portion of the he has order. Therefore, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal as to the § 2255 motion. Turning to the court s denial of Foster s § 3582(c)(2) motion, we have reviewed the record and find error. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of § 3582(c)(2) relief for the reasons stated by the district court. States, dispense No. 5:03-cr-00319-F-1 with oral argument (E.D.N.C. because reversible Foster v. United Aug. the no 1, 2012). facts and We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART 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.