Filed: Jan. 12, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7189 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BOBBY LAMONT HOWIE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:02-cr-00152-FDW-2) Submitted: November 23, 2009 Decided: January 12, 2010 Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobby Lamont Howie, Ap
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7189 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BOBBY LAMONT HOWIE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:02-cr-00152-FDW-2) Submitted: November 23, 2009 Decided: January 12, 2010 Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobby Lamont Howie, App..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7189 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BOBBY LAMONT HOWIE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:02-cr-00152-FDW-2) Submitted: November 23, 2009 Decided: January 12, 2010 Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobby Lamont Howie, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Bobby Lamont Howie appeals the district court’s order granting his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the district court. See United States v. Howie, No. 3:02-cr-00152- FDW-2 (W.D.N.C. June 9, 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
