Filed: Nov. 21, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7246 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DARYL ANDRE FULLER, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (7:98-cr-00076-HMH-1) Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 21, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daryl Andre Ful
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7246 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DARYL ANDRE FULLER, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (7:98-cr-00076-HMH-1) Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 21, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daryl Andre Full..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7246 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DARYL ANDRE FULLER, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (7:98-cr-00076-HMH-1) Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 21, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daryl Andre Fuller, Appellant Pro Se. Arthur Bradley Parham, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Daryl Andre Fuller appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Fuller, No. 7:98-cr-00076-HMH-1 (D.S.C. June 3, 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
