Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Beamon, 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 Karl Earl Beamon's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Beamon appealed the district court's ruling, but the appellate court found no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appellate court agreed with the district court's reasons for denying the motion and dispensed with oral argument, concluding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-02-04 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-7954

    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 Karl Earl Beamon's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Beamon appealed the district court's ruling, but the appellate court found no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appellate court agreed with the district court's reasons for denying the motion and dispensed with oral argument, concluding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Beamon, 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 Karl Earl Beamon's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Beamon appealed the district court's ruling, but the appellate court found no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appellate court agreed with the district court's reasons for denying the motion and dispensed with oral argument, concluding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 08-7954

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    KARL EARL BEAMON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Newport News.
    Jerome B. Friedman,
    District Judge. (4:99-cr-00004-JBF-1)

    Submitted:

    January 7, 2009

    Decided:

    February 4, 2009

    Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Karl Earl Beamon, Appellant Pro Se.


    Assistant
    United
    States
    Attorney,
    Appellee.

    James Ashford Metcalfe,


    Norfolk,
    Virginia,
    for

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Karl Earl Beamon appeals the district courts order
    denying
    (2006).
    error.

    his

    motion

    filed

    pursuant

    to

    18

    U.S.C.

    3582(c)(2)

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible


    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

    district court.

    United States v. Beamon, No. 4:99-cr-00004-JBF-

    1 (E.D. Va. Aug. 14, 2008).

    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