Filed: Mar. 18, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8460 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KINGDAWUD MUJAHID BURGESS, a/k/a David Clifton Burgess, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00429-GBL-1) Submitted: March 12, 2009 Decided: March 18, 2009 Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by u
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8460 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KINGDAWUD MUJAHID BURGESS, a/k/a David Clifton Burgess, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00429-GBL-1) Submitted: March 12, 2009 Decided: March 18, 2009 Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by un..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8460 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KINGDAWUD MUJAHID BURGESS, a/k/a David Clifton Burgess, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00429-GBL-1) Submitted: March 12, 2009 Decided: March 18, 2009 Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kingdawud Mujahid Burgess, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Michael Fitzpatrick, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kingdawud Mujahid Burgess appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (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. Burgess, No. 1:06-cr-00429-GBL-1 (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 5, 2008, entered Nov. 6, 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
