Filed: Apr. 28, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7372 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CLEVELAND MCLEAN, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5; 2:08-cv-00588-RGD) Submitted: April 14, 2011 Decided: April 28, 2011 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7372 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CLEVELAND MCLEAN, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5; 2:08-cv-00588-RGD) Submitted: April 14, 2011 Decided: April 28, 2011 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7372
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
CLEVELAND MCLEAN, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5; 2:08-cv-00588-RGD)
Submitted: April 14, 2011 Decided: April 28, 2011
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Cleveland McLean, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Neil H. MacBride,
United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cleveland McLean, Jr., appeals the district court’s
order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006) motion. We previously
remanded the case for further consideration of McLean’s motion.
The district court reconsidered the motion and again denied it.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. United States v. McLean, Nos. 2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5;
2:08-cv-00588-RGD (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 13 and entered Sept. 14,
2010). We grant McLean’s motion to supplement his informal
brief. 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