United States v. Chappell

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Chappell

333 F. App'x 728

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 14, 2009·No. No. 08-6736·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Duala Chappell appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Chappell, No. 3:95-cr-00017-3-SGW (W.D.Va. Mar. 20, 2009). We deny Chappell’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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Duala Chappell appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Chappell, No. 3:95-cr-00017-3-SGW (W.D.Va. Mar. 20, 2009). We deny Chappell’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.

United States v. Chappell, 333 F. App'x 728 (4th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

333 F. App'x 728 (United States v. Chappell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related