United States v. Barnett

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Barnett

22 F. App'x 330

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Barnett. Read the opinion of the Court — 63 F. App'x 643 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 2, 2002·No. 01-7347·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Dave W. Barnett appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)(1994) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Barnett, No. CR-96-66 (E.D. Va. filed July 2, 2001 & entered July 3, 2001). 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.

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

PER CURIAM.

Dave W. Barnett appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)(1994) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Barnett, No. CR-96-66 (E.D. Va. filed July 2, 2001 & entered July 3, 2001). 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.

United States v. Barnett, 22 F. App'x 330 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

22 F. App'x 330 (United States v. Barnett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related