United States v. Mays

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Mays

472 F. App'x 264

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 1, 2012

DocketNo. 12-6352

StatusPublished

This text of 472 F. App'x 264 (United States v. Mays) 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. Mays, 472 F. App'x 264 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Marion Mays appeals the district court’s order denying Mays’ 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court and deny Mays’ motion to appoint' counsel. United States v. Mays, No. 1:03-cr-00726-MBS-1 (D.S.C. Dec. 19, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be[265]*265fore 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:

Marion Mays appeals the district court’s order denying Mays’ 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court and deny Mays’ motion to appoint' counsel. United States v. Mays, No. 1:03-cr-00726-MBS-1 (D.S.C. Dec. 19, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be[265]*265fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

472 F. App'x 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mays-ca4-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack