United States v. Mack

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Mack

470 F. App'x 167

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 20, 2012

DocketNo. 12-6052

StatusPublished

This text of 470 F. App'x 167 (United States v. Mack) 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. Mack, 470 F. App'x 167 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Koa Dannette Mack appeals the district court’s order denying her 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence based on Amendments 706 and 750 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“USSG”) (2010). Because neither amendment has the effect of lowering Mack’s applicable Guidelines range, we affirm the district court’s order. See USSG § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B), p.s. 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

PER CURIAM:

Koa Dannette Mack appeals the district court’s order denying her 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence based on Amendments 706 and 750 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“USSG”) (2010). Because neither amendment has the effect of lowering Mack’s applicable Guidelines range, we affirm the district court’s order. See USSG § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B), p.s. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

470 F. App'x 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mack-ca4-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack