Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Ingram, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Herman Lee Ingram's motion to reduce his sentence. Ingram 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 Ingram's motion and dispensed with oral arguments, concluding the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-04-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-6108

    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 Herman Lee Ingram's motion to reduce his sentence. Ingram 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 Ingram's motion and dispensed with oral arguments, concluding the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Ingram, 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 Herman Lee Ingram's motion to reduce his sentence. Ingram 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 Ingram's motion and dispensed with oral arguments, concluding the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 11-6108

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    HERMAN LEE INGRAM,
    Defendant Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    Henry E. Hudson, District
    Judge. (3:05-cr-00361-HEH-1)

    Submitted:

    April 8, 2011

    Decided:

    April 22, 2011

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Herman Lee Ingram, Appellant Pro Se.


    Olivia L. Norman, OFFICE
    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Herman Lee Ingram appeals the district courts order
    denying his 18 U.S.C. 3582(c) (2006) motion for a sentence
    reduction.
    error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

    district court.

    United States v. Ingram, No. 3:05-cr-00361-HEH-

    1 (E.D. Va. Dec. 21, 2010).

    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