Filed: Jan. 26, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7001 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MELDON IRVIN WASHINGTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:00-cr-00287-REP-1) Submitted: January 12, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Meldon Irvin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7001 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MELDON IRVIN WASHINGTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:00-cr-00287-REP-1) Submitted: January 12, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Meldon Irvin W..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7001 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MELDON IRVIN WASHINGTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:00-cr-00287-REP-1) Submitted: January 12, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Meldon Irvin Washington, Appellant Pro Se. John Staige Davis, V, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Meldon Irvin Washington appeals the district court’s order denying 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 for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Washington, No. 3:00-cr-00287-REP-1 (E.D. Va. May 7, 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
