United States v. Fonville

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Fonville

475 F. App'x 877

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 27, 2012·No. No. 12-6711·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Calvin Fonville appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion to reduce his sentence. Because Fonville’s Guidelines range remains unchanged under Amendment 750 to the Sentencing Guidelines, we [878] find no reversible error. See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Calvin Fonville appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion to reduce his sentence. Because Fonville’s Guidelines range remains unchanged under Amendment 750 to the Sentencing Guidelines, we [878] find no reversible error. See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th Cir.2004). 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.

United States v. Fonville, 475 F. App'x 877 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

475 F. App'x 877 (United States v. Fonville) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related