United States v. Sledd

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Sledd

332 F. App'x 24

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 2, 2009·No. No. 09-6656·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Joshua T. Sledd appeals the district court’s order denying his § 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Therefore we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Sledd, No. 5:04-cr-30016-gec-5 (W.D.Va. March 27, 2009). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Joshua T. Sledd appeals the district court’s order denying his § 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Therefore we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Sledd, No. 5:04-cr-30016-gec-5 (W.D.Va. March 27, 2009). 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.

United States v. Sledd, 332 F. App'x 24 (4th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

332 F. App'x 24 (United States v. Sledd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related