Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Sherrill, 08-7854 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 08-7854 Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 26, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7854 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. LARICCO EUGENE SHERRILL, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:04-cr-00220-RJC-CH-1) Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 26, 2009 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Claire
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7854 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. LARICCO EUGENE SHERRILL, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:04-cr-00220-RJC-CH-1) Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 26, 2009 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Claire J. Rauscher, Executive Director, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Matthew R. Segal, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Laricco Eugene Sherrill appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a reduced sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the motions for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Sherrill, No. 3:04-cr- 00220-RJC-CH-1 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 27, 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