Filed: Sep. 11, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7814 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CARL ERIC HOPKINS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:02-cr-00540-JFA-1) Submitted: April 11, 2014 Decided: September 11, 2014 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carl Eric Hopkins, Appella
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7814 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CARL ERIC HOPKINS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:02-cr-00540-JFA-1) Submitted: April 11, 2014 Decided: September 11, 2014 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carl Eric Hopkins, Appellan..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7814 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CARL ERIC HOPKINS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:02-cr-00540-JFA-1) Submitted: April 11, 2014 Decided: September 11, 2014 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carl Eric Hopkins, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Carl Eric Hopkins appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to compel the Government to file a Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Hopkins, No. 3:02-cr-00540-JFA-1 (D.S.C. Oct. 8, 2013). We deny Hopkins' motion to appoint/assign counsel. 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
