United States v. Latten
This text of 536 F. App'x 325 (United States v. Latten) 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.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Melbourne Clarence Latten appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). The district court denied the motion because the Sentencing Guidelines Amendment 750 did not result in a change to the Guidelines sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no error. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the material before this court [326]*326and argument will not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
536 F. App'x 325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-latten-ca4-2013.