Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Bailey, 08-6561 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 08-6561 Visitors: 107
Filed: Aug. 08, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6561 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILLIAM M. JACKSON BAILEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. James P. Jones, Chief District Judge. (5:98-cr-30001-JPJ-2) Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: August 8, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William M. Ja
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6561 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILLIAM M. JACKSON BAILEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. James P. Jones, Chief District Judge. (5:98-cr-30001-JPJ-2) Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: August 8, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William M. Jackson Bailey, Appellant Pro Se. Jean Barrett Hudson, Assistant United States Attorney, Ray Burton Fitzgerald, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: William M. Jackson Bailey appeals from the district court’s orders denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2000), and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Bailey, No. 5:98-cr-30001- JPJ-2 (W.D. Va. filed Mar. 13, 2008 & entered Mar. 14, 2008; Apr. 14, 2008). 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