Filed: Oct. 08, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-8091 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. RICHARD ALLEN SMITH, JR., a/k/a Smitty, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:00-cr-00007-FPS-JES-1) Submitted: September 2, 2010 Decided: October 8, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-8091 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. RICHARD ALLEN SMITH, JR., a/k/a Smitty, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:00-cr-00007-FPS-JES-1) Submitted: September 2, 2010 Decided: October 8, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per c..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-8091
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
RICHARD ALLEN SMITH, JR., a/k/a Smitty,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
Senior District Judge. (2:00-cr-00007-FPS-JES-1)
Submitted: September 2, 2010 Decided: October 8, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richard Allen Smith, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Donald
Warner, Assistant United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Richard Allen Smith, Jr., appeals the district court’s
“Order Reducing Term of Imprisonment as a Result of Amended
Guideline Range Pursuant to [U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
§] 1B1.10 [(2008)].” We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. United States v. Smith, No. 2:00-cr-
00007-FPS-JES-1 (N.D. W. Va. Nov. 3, 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