United States v. Morton

316 F. App'x 226
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Morton. Read the opinion of the Court — 239 F. App'x 798
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 9, 2009·No. 08-8150·Unpublished

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jamison J. Morton appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Morton, No. 3:05-cr-00409-REP-1 (E.D.Va. Sept. 19, 2008). Further, we deny Morton’s motion for the appointment of counsel. 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

United States v. Morton, 316 F. App'x 226 (4th Cir. 2009).

316 F. App'x 226 (United States v. Morton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related