Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Sims, 08-7798 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 08-7798 Visitors: 36
Filed: Dec. 18, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7798 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERMAINE JERRELL SIMS, a/k/a Justice, a/k/a Jus, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (3:98-cr-00045-CMH-1) Submitted: December 11, 2008 Decided: December 18, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7798 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERMAINE JERRELL SIMS, a/k/a Justice, a/k/a Jus, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (3:98-cr-00045-CMH-1) Submitted: December 11, 2008 Decided: December 18, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jermaine Jerrell Sims, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholas Stephan Altimari, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, Kenneth E. Melson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jermaine Jerrell Sims appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006), and denying 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. Sims, No. 3:98-cr-00045-CMH-1 (E.D. Va. April 10 & May 20, 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