United States v. Queen
This text of United States v. Queen (United States v. Queen) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-8240
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SAMUEL ROBERT QUEEN, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:93- cr-00369-AMD-1)
Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 23, 2009
Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Samuel Robert Queen, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Samuel Robert Queen, Jr., appeals from the district
court’s orders denying his motion for reduction of sentence
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006), and denying his motion
for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. United States v. Queen, No. 1:93-cr-
00369-AMD-1 (D. Md. filed Sept. 19 & entered Sept. 22, 2008;
filed Oct. 1 & entered Oct. 2, 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
United States v. Queen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-queen-ca4-2009.