Filed: Oct. 21, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7407 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. TYRONE JAVELLE BOWENS, a/k/a Ty, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:02-cr-00037-RLV-1) Submitted: October 1, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ty
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7407 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. TYRONE JAVELLE BOWENS, a/k/a Ty, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:02-cr-00037-RLV-1) Submitted: October 1, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tyr..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7407 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. TYRONE JAVELLE BOWENS, a/k/a Ty, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:02-cr-00037-RLV-1) Submitted: October 1, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tyrone Javelle Bowens, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tyrone Javelle Bowens appeals the district court’s order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion and reducing his sentence to 118 months in prison. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. United States v. Bowens, No. 5:02-cr-00037-RLV-1 (W.D.N.C. July 16, 2009). 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
