Filed: Apr. 23, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6309 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JULIO CESAR PEREZ, a/k/a Jose Luis Villarreal, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CR-96-305) Submitted: April 10, 2001 Decided: April 23, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6309 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JULIO CESAR PEREZ, a/k/a Jose Luis Villarreal, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CR-96-305) Submitted: April 10, 2001 Decided: April 23, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6309 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JULIO CESAR PEREZ, a/k/a Jose Luis Villarreal, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CR-96-305) Submitted: April 10, 2001 Decided: April 23, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Julio Cesar Perez, Appellant Pro Se. Kelly Elizabeth Shackelford, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Julio Cesar Perez appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to modify a term of imprisonment. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Perez, No. CR-96-305 (D.S.C. Feb. 7, 2001). 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 2
