Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Steele, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Gerald Steele's motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision, as stated in its April 6, 2009 opinion. As the facts and legal arguments were adequately set forth in the case materials, the appellate court dispensed with oral arguments. The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of Steele's motion for a sentence reduction.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-08-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-6719

    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    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Gerald Steele's motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision, as stated in its April 6, 2009 opinion. As the facts and legal arguments were adequately set forth in the case materials, the appellate court dispensed with oral arguments. The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of Steele's motion for a sentence reduction.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Steele, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Gerald Steele's motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision, as stated in its April 6, 2009 opinion. As the facts and legal arguments were adequately set forth in the case materials, the appellate court dispensed with oral arguments. The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of Steele's motion for a sentence reduction.

    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. 09-6719

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    GERALD LAMONT STEELE,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Martin K. Reidinger,
    District Judge. (3:01-cr-00216-MR-11)

    Submitted:

    July 30, 2009

    Decided:

    August 5, 2009

    Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Gerald Lamont Steele, Appellant Pro Se. William A. Brafford,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina; Amy
    Elizabeth
    Ray,
    Assistant
    United
    States
    Attorney,
    Jill
    Westmoreland Rose, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
    Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Gerald
    order

    denying

    Lamont

    his

    Steele

    motion

    for

    U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006).


    find no reversible error.

    appeals
    a

    the

    sentence

    district

    reduction

    courts
    under

    18

    We have reviewed the record and


    See United States v. Hood, 556 F.3d

    226, 232-33 (4th Cir. 2009).

    Accordingly, we affirm for the

    reasons stated by the district court.

    United States v. Steele,

    No. 3:01-cr-00216-MR-11 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 6, 2009).

    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 in the decisional process.


    AFFIRMED

    You might also like