United States v. Williams

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Williams

672 F. App'x 325

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 11, 2017·No. No. 16-7134·Published

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Michael E. Williams appeals the district court’s order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Williams, No. 3:03-cr-00344-HEH-1 (E.D. Va. Aug. 10, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Michael E. Williams appeals the district court’s order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Williams, No. 3:03-cr-00344-HEH-1 (E.D. Va. Aug. 10, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

United States v. Williams, 672 F. App'x 325 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

672 F. App'x 325 (United States v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related