Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Toyon Jones, Jr., 14-6049 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-6049 Visitors: 19
Filed: Mar. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6049 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TOYON RASHAD JONES, JR., a/k/a Trouble, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:09-cr-00280-D-1) Submitted: February 27, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
More
                            UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 14-6049


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

TOYON RASHAD JONES, JR., a/k/a Trouble,

                Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.   James C. Dever, III,
Chief District Judge. (5:09-cr-00280-D-1)


Submitted:   February 27, 2014            Decided:   March 5, 2014


Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Toyon Rashad Jones, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Denise Walker, Seth
Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

            Toyon Rashad Jones, Jr., appeals the district court’s

order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a

sentence reduction.     We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error.    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court.         United States v. Jones, No. 5:09-cr-

00280-D-1   (E.D.N.C.   Jan.    6,   2014).   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

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer