Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Industrious, 07-7644 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 07-7644 Visitors: 2
Filed: Apr. 28, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7644 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERRY INDUSTRIOUS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (1:00-cr-00020-NCT; 1:06-cv-00094-NCT) Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 28, 2008 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7644 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERRY INDUSTRIOUS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (1:00-cr-00020-NCT; 1:06-cv-00094-NCT) Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 28, 2008 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry Industrious, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jerry Industrious appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Industrious’ motion for reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 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. Industrious, Nos. 1:00-cr-00020-NCT; 1:06-cv-00094-NCT (M.D.N.C. Oct. 24, 2007). We further deny Industrious’ motion for appointment of counsel. 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 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer