Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Patrick Francis, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Patrick Earl Francis's motion to reduce his sentence. The district court had found no reversible error in denying the motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The Court of Appeals similarly found no error in the district court's decision and affirmed the ruling for the reasons stated in the lower court's opinion. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral argument, finding the relevant facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-08-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-6963

    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 Patrick Earl Francis's motion to reduce his sentence. The district court had found no reversible error in denying the motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The Court of Appeals similarly found no error in the district court's decision and affirmed the ruling for the reasons stated in the lower court's opinion. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral argument, finding the relevant facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Patrick Francis, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Patrick Earl Francis's motion to reduce his sentence. The district court had found no reversible error in denying the motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The Court of Appeals similarly found no error in the district court's decision and affirmed the ruling for the reasons stated in the lower court's opinion. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral argument, finding the relevant facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 12-6963

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    PATRICK EARL FRANCIS, a/k/a Jerome Durant Brown,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
    Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
    District Judge. (7:94-cr-40106-JLK-4)

    Submitted:

    August 16, 2012

    Decided:

    August 21, 2012

    Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Patrick Earl Francis, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford,


    Assistant
    United
    States
    Attorney,
    Roanoke,
    Virginia,
    for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Patrick
    order

    denying

    his

    Earl
    18

    reduction of sentence.
    reversible error.

    Francis
    U.S.C.

    appeals

    the

    3582(c)(2)

    district
    (2006)

    courts

    motion

    for

    We have reviewed the record and find no

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    United States v. Francis, No. 7:94-cr-

    40106-JLK-4 (W.D. Va. May 18, 2012).

    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