Filed: Oct. 26, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6944 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CURTIS ARNOLD, Defendant - Appellant.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. (3:05-cr-00046-RJC-DSC-2) Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 26, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unp
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6944 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CURTIS ARNOLD, Defendant - Appellant.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. (3:05-cr-00046-RJC-DSC-2) Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 26, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpu..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6944 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CURTIS ARNOLD, Defendant - Appellant.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. (3:05-cr-00046-RJC-DSC-2) Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 26, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curtis Arnold, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas A. O’Malley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Curtis Arnold appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion to amend his presentence report. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Arnold, No. 3:05-cr-00046-RJC-DSC-2 (W.D.N.C. May 13, 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
