Filed: Aug. 11, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6863 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GARY MICHAEL LUCAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, Chief District Judge. (2:05-cr-00055-2) Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: August 11, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary Michael Luc
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6863 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GARY MICHAEL LUCAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, Chief District Judge. (2:05-cr-00055-2) Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: August 11, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary Michael Luca..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6863 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GARY MICHAEL LUCAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, Chief District Judge. (2:05-cr-00055-2) Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: August 11, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary Michael Lucas, Appellant Pro Se. John J. Frail, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Gary Michael Lucas appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for modification of sentence, 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c)(2) (West 2000 & Supp. 2008). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Lucas, No. 2:05-cr-00055-2 (S.D.W. Va. Apr. 23, 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 -
