United States v. Steele

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Steele

330 F. App'x 427

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 5, 2009·No. No. 09-6719·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gerald Lamont Steele appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See United States v. Hood, 556 F.3d 226, 232-33 (4th Cir.2009). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Steele, No. 3:01-cr-00216-MR-11 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 6, 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 in the deci-sional 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Gerald Lamont Steele appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See United States v. Hood, 556 F.3d 226, 232-33 (4th Cir.2009). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Steele, No. 3:01-cr-00216-MR-11 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 6, 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 in the deci-sional process.

AFFIRMED.

United States v. Steele, 330 F. App'x 427 (4th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

330 F. App'x 427 (United States v. Steele) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related