Filed: Nov. 21, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7229 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MALCOLM EUGENE GOLSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:01-cr-00047-RGD-1) Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 21, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Malcolm Euge
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7229 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MALCOLM EUGENE GOLSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:01-cr-00047-RGD-1) Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 21, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Malcolm Eugen..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7229 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MALCOLM EUGENE GOLSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:01-cr-00047-RGD-1) Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 21, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Malcolm Eugene Golson, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Pellatiro Tayman, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Malcolm Eugene Golson appeals a district court order denying his motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Golson, No. 2:01-cr- 00047-RGD (E.D. Va. June 17, 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
