PER CURIAM.
Edward Otis Rutland appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for modification of sentence. We have re viewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Rutland, No. CR-91-132 (D.S.C. Oct. 10, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.