Filed: Dec. 05, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7392 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALPHONZO WILSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-99-33) Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: December 5, 2003 Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7392 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALPHONZO WILSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-99-33) Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: December 5, 2003 Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7392 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALPHONZO WILSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-99-33) Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: December 5, 2003 Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alphonzo Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Felice McConnell Corpening, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Alphonzo Wilson appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for modification of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Wilson, No. CR-99-33 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 19, 2003). 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
