Filed: Mar. 31, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6041 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DIRRLO DELCID, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00495-LMB-2) Submitted: March 25, 2008 Decided: March 31, 2008 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dirrlo Delcid, Appellant Pro Se. La
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6041 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DIRRLO DELCID, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00495-LMB-2) Submitted: March 25, 2008 Decided: March 31, 2008 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dirrlo Delcid, Appellant Pro Se. Law..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6041 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DIRRLO DELCID, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00495-LMB-2) Submitted: March 25, 2008 Decided: March 31, 2008 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dirrlo Delcid, Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Joseph Leiser, Assistant United States Attorney, James T. Strawley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dirrlo Delcid appeals the district court’s order construing his “motion for sentence adjustment” as a Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 motion for reduction of sentence and denying the motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Delcid, No. 1:06-cr-00495-LMB-2 (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 19, 2007; entered Nov. 20, 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 -