United States v. Ricky Sullivan

842 F.2d 1293, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3258, 1988 WL 24290
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 16, 1988
Docket87-6135
StatusUnpublished

This text of 842 F.2d 1293 (United States v. Ricky Sullivan) 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. Ricky Sullivan, 842 F.2d 1293, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3258, 1988 WL 24290 (4th Cir. 1988).

Opinion

842 F.2d 1293
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Ricky SULLIVAN, Defendant-Appellant.

87-6135.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

March 16, 1988.

Ricky Sullivan, appellant pro se.

John William McIntosh, William Corley Lucius, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, for appellee.

Before WIDENER, SPROUSE and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Ricky Sullivan, a federal inmate, appeals the district court's denial of his "Motion for Reconsideration to Amend Sentence." As Sullivan's motion was filed well over 120 days after imposition of sentence, it was untimely as a motion for reduction under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b). See also United States v. Breit, 754 F.2d 526 (4th Cir.1985). The district court considered the motion under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(a), which permits the court to correct an illegal sentence at anytime. Finding no illegality, the district court denied relief.

As Sullivan's sentence, imposed upon conviction under 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841(a)(1), was within the sentencing limits provided by 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841(b), and as we find no other basis for illegality, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the dispositive issues have been recently decided authoritatively.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Calvin W. Breit
754 F.2d 526 (Fourth Circuit, 1985)
United States v. Nardone (William)
842 F.2d 1293 (Fourth Circuit, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
842 F.2d 1293, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3258, 1988 WL 24290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ricky-sullivan-ca4-1988.