Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Darryl Moffett's motion to reduce his sentence. Moffett argued the district court should have reduced his sentence under Amendment 706 of the Sentencing Guidelines. However, the appeals court found the district court properly exercised its discretion under the § 3553(a) factors in denying the motion. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-05-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-7556

    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 Darryl Moffett's motion to reduce his sentence. Moffett argued the district court should have reduced his sentence under Amendment 706 of the Sentencing Guidelines. However, the appeals court found the district court properly exercised its discretion under the § 3553(a) factors in denying the motion. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Moffett, 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 Darryl Moffett's motion to reduce his sentence. Moffett argued the district court should have reduced his sentence under Amendment 706 of the Sentencing Guidelines. However, the appeals court found the district court properly exercised its discretion under the § 3553(a) factors in denying the motion. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 08-7556

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DARRYL L. MOFFETT,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,
    District Judge. (3:96-cr-00170-RLV-1)

    Submitted:

    May 6, 2009

    Decided:

    May 26, 2009

    Before SHEDD and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Darryl L. Moffett, 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:
    Darryl L. Moffett appeals the district courts order
    denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C.
    3582(c)(2) (2006).

    Moffett argues that the district court

    erred by failing to reduce his sentence under Amendment 706 of


    the Guidelines, see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG)
    2D1.1(c) (2008); USSG App. C, Amend. 706.

    We have reviewed

    the record and find the district court properly exercised its
    discretion after considering the applicable 18 U.S.C.
    (2006) factors.

    Accordingly, we affirm.

    3553(a)

    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