United States v. Peterson

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 4, 2009
Docket08-8552
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Peterson (United States v. Peterson) 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. Peterson, (4th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8552

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

STEVEN DESMOND PETERSON, a/k/a Primo,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (3:94-cr-00046-H-3)

Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 4, 2009

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven Desmond Peterson, Appellant Pro Se. Anne Margaret Hayes, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Steven Desmond Peterson appeals from the district

court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of a prior

order denying relief on his motion for reduction of sentence, 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. Peterson, No.

3:94-cr-00046-H-3 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 17, 2008). 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Peterson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-peterson-ca4-2009.