United States v. Crockett

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Crockett

280 F. App'x 266

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Crockett. Read the opinion of the Court — 418 F. App'x 239 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 5, 2008·No. No. 08-6227·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Dale Crockett appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider a prior order denying his motion to modify restitution payments. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Crockett, No. 7:98-cr-00798-GRA-1, 2008 WL 153976 (D.S.C. Jan. 14, 2008). 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:

Timothy Dale Crockett appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider a prior order denying his motion to modify restitution payments. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Crockett, No. 7:98-cr-00798-GRA-1, 2008 WL 153976 (D.S.C. Jan. 14, 2008). 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. Crockett, 280 F. App'x 266 (4th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

280 F. App'x 266 (United States v. Crockett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.