# United States v. Ryan Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · July 29, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11111277

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** July 29, 2025
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11111277

## Opinion text

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6072 Doc: 8 Filed: 07/29/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6072

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RYAN CRAIG BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.
Joseph Dawson, III, District Judge. (4:08-cr-00184-JD-1)

Submitted: July 24, 2025 Decided: July 29, 2025

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ryan Craig Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Michael G. Shedd, Assistant United States Attorney,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 25-6072 Doc: 8 Filed: 07/29/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Ryan Craig Brown appeals the district court’s order denying Brown’s motion for

sentence reduction, brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), based on Amendment 821

to the Sentencing Guidelines. Upon review, we conclude that the district court did not

abuse its discretion in denying Brown’s motion. See United States v. Martin, 916 F.3d

389, 395 (4th Cir. 2019) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the district

court’s order. United States v. Brown, No. 4:08-cr-00184-JD-1 (D.S.C. Dec. 27, 2024).

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

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11111277. Public record. Not legal advice.