Filed: Nov. 29, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6971 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KENNETH JUNIOR SMITH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (7:98-cr-01169-HMH) Submitted: November 20, 2007 Decided: November 29, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Jun
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6971 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KENNETH JUNIOR SMITH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (7:98-cr-01169-HMH) Submitted: November 20, 2007 Decided: November 29, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Juni..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6971 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KENNETH JUNIOR SMITH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (7:98-cr-01169-HMH) Submitted: November 20, 2007 Decided: November 29, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Junior Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean Howard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kenneth Junior Smith appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2000), and for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Smith, No. 7:98-cr-01169-HMH (D.S.C. Apr. 24, 2007). 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 -
