Filed: Oct. 10, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6836 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus THOMAS FLOYD LITTLEJOHN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:90-cr-231-5) Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 10, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Floyd
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6836 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus THOMAS FLOYD LITTLEJOHN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:90-cr-231-5) Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 10, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Floyd ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6836 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus THOMAS FLOYD LITTLEJOHN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:90-cr-231-5) Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 10, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Floyd Littlejohn, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Thomas Floyd Littlejohn appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Littlejohn, No. 1:90-cr-231-5 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 17, 2006). 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 -
