Filed: Jul. 28, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6531 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DANTE QAADIR DAILEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:14-cr-00011-RAJ-LRL-4) Submitted: July 23, 2020 Decided: July 28, 2020 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dante Qaadir Dailey, A
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6531 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DANTE QAADIR DAILEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:14-cr-00011-RAJ-LRL-4) Submitted: July 23, 2020 Decided: July 28, 2020 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dante Qaadir Dailey, Ap..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-6531
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DANTE QAADIR DAILEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:14-cr-00011-RAJ-LRL-4)
Submitted: July 23, 2020 Decided: July 28, 2020
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dante Qaadir Dailey, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dante Qaadir Dailey appeals the district court’s order denying his motion seeking
relief under the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194 (2018), and a
sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2018). We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
United States v. Dailey, No. 2:14-cr-00011-RAJ-LRL-4 (E.D. Va. Mar. 30, 2020).
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
2