UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Frank NORFLEET, Defendant-Appellant, 36 F. App'x 71

PER CURIAM. William Frank Norfleet appeals the sentence imposed upon the revocation of his supervised release. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. The district court did not err in imposing a sentence above that recommended by U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 7B1.4(a), p.s. (2000). 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 3583(e)(3), (g) (West 2000); see generally United States v. Davis, 53 F.3d 638, 640-41 & nn. 1, 6, 10 (4th Cir.1995). Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Norfleet, No. CR-90-104 (E.D.Va. Oct. 16, 2001).

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.