United States v. Nelson

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Nelson

583 F. App'x 211

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 24, 2014·No. No. 14-6366·Published

Opinion

[212] Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Cleveland Nelson appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2012) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Nelson, No. 3:94-cr-00057-H-2 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 26, 2014). We deny the motion for summary disposition and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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

[212] Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Cleveland Nelson appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2012) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Nelson, No. 3:94-cr-00057-H-2 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 26, 2014). We deny the motion for summary disposition and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

United States v. Nelson, 583 F. App'x 211 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

583 F. App'x 211 (United States v. Nelson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related