United States v. Haynesworth

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Haynesworth

30 F. App'x 197

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 5, 2002

Docket01-7874

StatusUnpublished

This text of 30 F. App'x 197 (United States v. Haynesworth) 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. Haynesworth, 30 F. App'x 197 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

George L. Haynesworth appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to Fed. R.Crim.P. 35(b). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Haynesworth, No. CR-00-65 (E.D.Va. Sept. 25, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before *198 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.

George L. Haynesworth appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to Fed. R.Crim.P. 35(b). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Haynesworth, No. CR-00-65 (E.D.Va. Sept. 25, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before *198 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 F. App'x 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-haynesworth-ca4-2002.