Filed: Aug. 30, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6535 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. KEVIN HOWELL, a/k/a William Anthony Johnson, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (2:94-cr-00020-JAB-2) Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 30, 2010 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6535 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. KEVIN HOWELL, a/k/a William Anthony Johnson, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (2:94-cr-00020-JAB-2) Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 30, 2010 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam o..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6535
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
KEVIN HOWELL, a/k/a William Anthony Johnson,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Chief District Judge. (2:94-cr-00020-JAB-2)
Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 30, 2010
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kevin Howell, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Cannon, Angela Hewlett
Miller, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greensboro, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kevin Howell appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for
reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. United States v. Howell, No. 2:94-cr-
00020-JAB-2 (M.D.N.C. filed July 10, 2009; entered July 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