United States v. Reyes

402 F. App'x 802
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Reyes. Read the opinion of the Court — 340 F. App'x 868
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided November 30, 2010·No. No. 10-6760·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Edwin Arnoldo Reyes appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to construe his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion as a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion. In his informal brief, Reyes challenges an earlier order denying his § 3582 motion. Assuming that Reyes has properly appealed this order, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Reyes, No. 8:01-cr-00533-PJM-20 (D.Md. Mar. 8, 2010). We deny Reyes’ 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. Reyes, 402 F. App'x 802 (4th Cir. 2010).

402 F. App'x 802 (United States v. Reyes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related