United States v. Brim
This text of United States v. Brim (United States v. Brim) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6281
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ANTHONY WENDELL BRIM,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (4:06-cr-00009-jlk-4)
Submitted: April 20, 2011 Decided: May 5, 2011
Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Wendell Brim, Appellant Pro Se. Craig Jon Jacobsen, I, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Anthony Wendell Brim appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)
(2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. United States v. Brim, No. 4:06-cr-00009-jlk-4
(W.D. Va. Feb. 17, 2011). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Brim, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-brim-ca4-2011.