Filed: Oct. 05, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6710 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. MELBA NOELY LAZO, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00126-LMB-2) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 5, 2010 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melba Noely Lazo, Appel
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6710 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. MELBA NOELY LAZO, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00126-LMB-2) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 5, 2010 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melba Noely Lazo, Appell..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6710 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. MELBA NOELY LAZO, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00126-LMB-2) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 5, 2010 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melba Noely Lazo, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Joseph Grooms, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Melba Noely Lazo appeals the district court’s order denying her “Reconsideration motion to reduce sentence minor participation.” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Lazo, No. 1:08-cr- 00126-LMB-2 (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 22, 2010; entered Apr. 23, 2010). 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
