United States v. Nixon

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Nixon. Read the opinion of the Court — 396 F. App'x 1
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 13, 2010·No. 10-6134A·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6134

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

GARY EDWARD NIXON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:04-cr-00085-F-1)

Submitted: August 25, 2010 Decided: September 13, 2010

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Edward Nixon, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Gary Edward Nixon appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18

U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons

stated by the district court. United States v. Nixon, No. 7:04-

cr-00085-F-1 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 15, 2009). We deny Nixon’s motion

for 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. Nixon, (4th Cir. 2010).

United States v. Nixon (United States v. Nixon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related