Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    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 Earl Richardson's motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). Richardson appealed the district court's ruling pro se. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. As such, the appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of Richardson's motion for the reasons stated in its ruling.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-12-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7418

    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 Earl Richardson's motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). Richardson appealed the district court's ruling pro se. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. As such, the appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of Richardson's motion for the reasons stated in its ruling.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Earl Richardson's motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). Richardson appealed the district court's ruling pro se. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. As such, the appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of Richardson's motion for the reasons stated in its ruling.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 09-7418

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    EARL E. RICHARDSON,
    Defendant Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    James R. Spencer, Chief
    District Judge. (3:96-cr-00122-JRS-1)

    Submitted:

    December 10, 2009

    Before WILKINSON and


    Senior Circuit Judge.

    GREGORY,

    Decided:

    Circuit

    December 17, 2009

    Judges,

    and

    HAMILTON,

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Earl E. Richardson, Appellant Pro Se.


    Stephen Wiley Miller,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Earl E. Richardson appeals the district courts order
    denying his 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction
    of sentence.
    error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

    district court.

    United States v. Richardson, No. 3:96-cr-00122-

    JRS-1 (E.D. Va. July 2, 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 the
    decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like