United States v. Rodgers

434 F. App'x 188
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 4, 2011·No. No. 11-6285·Published·Cited by 14 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Carson Darrell Rodgers appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Rodgers, No. 1:02-cr-00374-WO-2 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 14, 2011). We deny Rodgers’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. Rodgers, 434 F. App'x 188 (4th Cir. 2011).

434 F. App'x 188 (United States v. Rodgers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Reid v. United States
Federal Claims, 2020
Fisher v. United States
Federal Claims, 2020
Skylights LLC v. Byron
112 F. Supp. 3d 1145 (D. Nevada, 2015)
Perry Capital LLC v. Lew
70 F. Supp. 3d 208 (District of Columbia, 2014)
Leon County Florida v. Federal Housing Finance Agency
700 F.3d 1273 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
Kellmer ex rel. Fannie Mae v. Raines
674 F.3d 848 (D.C. Circuit, 2012)