Billy Ray Crawford, Jr., appeals from the district courts order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(B) and § 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018 (FSA 2018), Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222. Crawford challenges the sufficiency of the district courts explanation for denying his motion.
The district court stated it considered the presentence report, the sentence reduction report prepared for the case, the statutory range, the range under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual, the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and the post-sentencing mitigation evidence. The court then declined to exercise its discretion to reduce Crawfords sentence, citing five individualized reasons relative to his offense conduct and criminal history. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Crawfords motion, see United States v. Jackson, 952 F.3d 492, 497, 502 (4th Cir. 2020) (reviewing decision on FSA 2018 sentence reduction motion for abuse of discretion), and thus affirm the denial order, United States v. Crawford, No. 4:05-cr-00470-TLW-1, 2020 WL 95689 (D.S.C. Jan 8, 2020). 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
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.