United States v. Eanes

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Eanes

472 F. App'x 182

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 26, 2012

DocketNo. 12-6320

StatusPublished

This text of 472 F. App'x 182 (United States v. Eanes) 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.

Bluebook

United States v. Eanes, 472 F. App'x 182 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Malik Lucien Eanes appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. 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:

Malik Lucien Eanes appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

472 F. App'x 182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-eanes-ca4-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack