United States v. Chapman

320 F. App'x 184
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Chapman. Read the opinion of the Court — 666 F.3d 220
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 7, 2009·No. No. 08-6912·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Shirley Marie Chapman appeals the district court’s order granting in part and denying in part her motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) and reducing her sentence to 57 months’ imprisonment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court, United States v. Chapman, No. 3:06-cr-00007-JPB-1 (N.D.W.Va. May 28, 2008), and in our recent decision in United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247 (4th Cir.2009). We also deny Chapman’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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

United States v. Chapman, 320 F. App'x 184 (4th Cir. 2009).

320 F. App'x 184 (United States v. Chapman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Dunphy
551 F.3d 247 (Fourth Circuit, 2009)