U.S. v. PATTERSON, 12-6720. (2012)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20120814143
Visitors: 1
Filed: Aug. 14, 2012
Latest Update: Aug. 14, 2012
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Steven Charles Patterson appeals the district court's order granting his motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582 (2006) for a sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Patterson, No. 1:08-cr-00010-MR-4 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 3, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Steven Charles Patterson appeals the district court's order granting his motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582 (2006) for a sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Patterson, No. 1:08-cr-00010-MR-4 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 3, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ..
More
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Steven Charles Patterson appeals the district court's order granting his motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006) for a sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Patterson, No. 1:08-cr-00010-MR-4 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 3, 2012). 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.
Source: Leagle
