Filed: Dec. 10, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7314 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RYAN O’NEIL LANSDOWNE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis III, Senior District Judge. (1:00-cr-00185-TSE-1) Submitted: December 4, 2013 Decided: December 10, 2013 Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7314 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RYAN O’NEIL LANSDOWNE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis III, Senior District Judge. (1:00-cr-00185-TSE-1) Submitted: December 4, 2013 Decided: December 10, 2013 Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam o..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7314
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RYAN O’NEIL LANSDOWNE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis III, Senior
District Judge. (1:00-cr-00185-TSE-1)
Submitted: December 4, 2013 Decided: December 10, 2013
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ryan O’Neil Lansdowne, Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Joseph
Leiser, Kimberly Riley Pedersen, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ryan O’Neil Lansdowne seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012). We have reviewed the district
court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Lansdowne, No. 1:00-cr-00185-TSE-1 (E.D. Va. filed
July 31, 2013 & entered Aug. 1, 2013). We deny Lansdowne’s
pending motion for leave to supplement his informal brief. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2