Troy Lamont Murphy appeals the district courts order denying his motion to reduce sentence based on the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 404, 132 Stat. 5194. On appeal, Murphy asserts that the district court failed to provide an explanation for rejecting arguments he raised for the first time in his reply to the Governments opposition to his motion. Because new arguments cannot be raised in a reply brief, the district court was not required to consider Murphys argument, much less to provide an explicit analysis. See United States v. Smalls, 720 F.3d 193, 197 (4th Cir. 2013). As such, we affirm the district courts order. 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.