United States v. Harrison

332 F. App'x 928
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Harrison. Read the opinion of the Court — 261 F. App'x 499
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 5, 2009·No. No. 09-6254·Published

Opinion

[929]*929Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Darrol J. Harrison appeals from the district court’s order granting in part his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006), but denying his motion to the extent that Harrison sought a resentencing. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Harrison, No. 2:92-cr-00446-DCN-1 (D.S.C. Jan. 27, 2009); see United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247, 257 (4th Cir.2009). We deny Harrison’s motions for appointment of counsel and for an extension of time and 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

United States v. Harrison, 332 F. App'x 928 (4th Cir. 2009).

332 F. App'x 928 (United States v. Harrison) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Dunphy
551 F.3d 247 (Fourth Circuit, 2009)