Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Watkins, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. The court dismissed Nathaniel Watkins' appeal of a district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) and denial of reconsideration. While the district court incorrectly construed the motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 instead of 3582(c)(2), any error was harmless as Watkins was not entitled to relief under the amended sentencing guidelines. The court also found the district court properly denied Watkins' remaining claims as successive and that he waived appellate review of the denial of reconsideration by failing to challenge it in his informal brief.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-05-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-6400

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. The court dismissed Nathaniel Watkins' appeal of a district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) and denial of reconsideration. While the district court incorrectly construed the motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 instead of 3582(c)(2), any error was harmless as Watkins was not entitled to relief under the amended sentencing guidelines. The court also found the district court properly denied Watkins' remaining claims as successive and that he waived appellate review of the denial of reconsideration by failing to challenge it in his informal brief.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views3 pages

    United States v. Watkins, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. The court dismissed Nathaniel Watkins' appeal of a district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) and denial of reconsideration. While the district court incorrectly construed the motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 instead of 3582(c)(2), any error was harmless as Watkins was not entitled to relief under the amended sentencing guidelines. The court also found the district court properly denied Watkins' remaining claims as successive and that he waived appellate review of the denial of reconsideration by failing to challenge it in his informal brief.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 02-6400

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    NATHANIEL WATKINS, a/k/a J.R., a/k/a Peanut,
    a/k/a Nut,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    Claude M. Hilton, Chief
    District Judge. (CR-90-260-A, CA-93-1035-AM)

    Submitted:

    April 25, 2002

    Decided:

    May 8, 2002

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


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Nathaniel Watkins, Appellant Pro Se. Michael R. Smythers, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Nathaniel Watkins seeks to appeal the district courts orders
    denying his motion filed under 18 U.S.C.A. 3582(c)(2) (West
    2000), which the court construed as being filed under 28 U.S.C.A.

    2255

    (West

    Supp.

    reconsideration.

    2001),

    and

    denying

    his

    motion

    for

    We have reviewed the record and the district

    courts opinions and find no reversible error.

    Although the

    district court construed Watkins claim that his base offense level
    should be reduced to thirty-eight in accordance with Amendment 505
    to the sentencing guidelines as being filed under 2255, the claim
    was properly brought under 3582(c)(2).

    We find that any error in

    construing that claim is harmless because, applying the Amendment


    to Watkins case, he is not entitled to relief.

    We also find that

    the district court properly denied Watkins remaining claims as


    being successive. Finally, with regard to the denial of his motion
    for reconsideration, Watkins failed to challenge that order in his
    informal brief and, therefore, has waived appellate review under
    4th Cir. R. 34(b).
    Accordingly,

    we

    deny

    certificate

    of

    appealability

    and

    dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district


    court.

    United States v. Watkins, Nos. CR-90-260-A; CA-93-1035-AM

    (E.D. Va. Jan. 4, 2002; Feb. 11, 2002).

    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.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like