United States v. Lee

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6069

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL ANTRANTRINO LEE,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:01-cr-00221-H-1)

Submitted: June 16, 2010 Decided: June 29, 2010

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Antrantrino Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Michael Antrantrino Lee appeals the district court’s

order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion. We

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we deny Lee’s motion for appointment of counsel and

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United

States v. Lee, No. 5:01-cr-00221-H-1 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 10, 2009).

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