Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. O'Neil, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Charles Edward O'Neil's motion for a sentence reduction. The appellate court reviewed the record and concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion, as set forth in United States v. Stewart. Accordingly, the appellate court affirmed the district court's order for the reasons stated therein and dispensed with oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-05-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-7694

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Charles Edward O'Neil's motion for a sentence reduction. The appellate court reviewed the record and concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion, as set forth in United States v. Stewart. Accordingly, the appellate court affirmed the district court's order for the reasons stated therein and dispensed with oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views2 pages

    United States v. O'Neil, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Charles Edward O'Neil's motion for a sentence reduction. The appellate court reviewed the record and concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion, as set forth in United States v. Stewart. Accordingly, the appellate court affirmed the district court's order for the reasons stated therein and dispensed with oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 10-7694

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    CHARLES EDWARD
    a/k/a Worm,

    ONEIL,

    a/k/a

    Charles

    Edward

    Oneil,

    Jr.,

    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
    Richard L.
    Voorhees, District Judge. (5:00-cr-00047-RLV-5)

    Submitted:

    May 26, 2011

    Decided:

    May 31, 2011

    Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Charles Edward ONeil, Appellant Pro Se.


    Amy Elizabeth Ray,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Charles
    order

    denying

    his

    Edward

    ONeil

    motion

    for

    appeals
    a

    the

    reduction

    district
    of

    courts

    sentence

    filed

    pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006).

    We have reviewed the

    record

    did

    and

    conclude

    the

    district

    court

    not

    595 F.3d 197, 200 (4th Cir. 2010).

    Accordingly, we affirm the

    district courts order for the reasons stated there.


    v.

    2010).
    legal
    before

    ONeil,

    No.

    its

    See United States v. Stewart,

    discretion in denying the motion.

    States

    abuse

    5:00-cr-00047-RLV-5

    See United

    (W.D.N.C.

    Dec.

    7,

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and


    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like