Bidgood v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Bidgood v. United States

21 F. App'x 145

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 23, 2001

Docket01-6652

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 21 F. App'x 145 (Bidgood v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bidgood v. United States, 21 F. App'x 145 (4th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

*146 PER CURIAM.

Bradley Dean Bidgood seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying the government’s motion to reduce his sentence under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b). We dismiss the appeal from the denial of the Rule 35(b) motion because the order is not reviewable. See United States v. Pridgen, 64 F.3d 147, 149-50 (4th Cir.1995).

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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

*146 PER CURIAM.

Bradley Dean Bidgood seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying the government’s motion to reduce his sentence under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b). We dismiss the appeal from the denial of the Rule 35(b) motion because the order is not reviewable. See United States v. Pridgen, 64 F.3d 147, 149-50 (4th Cir.1995).

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 F. App'x 145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bidgood-v-united-states-ca4-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack