United States v. Felix

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Felix

386 F. App'x 356

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided July 1, 2010·No. No. 10-6411·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William Felix appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006), and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Felix, No. 6:93-cr-00140-WLO-PTS-2 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 24, 2010; Apr. 26, 2010). 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

William Felix appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006), and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Felix, No. 6:93-cr-00140-WLO-PTS-2 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 24, 2010; Apr. 26, 2010). 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. Felix, 386 F. App'x 356 (4th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

386 F. App'x 356 (United States v. Felix) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related