Filed: Sep. 24, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6366 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CLEVELAND NELSON, a/k/a Cleve, a/k/a Fat Daddy, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (3:94-cr-00057-H-2) Submitted: September 15, 2014 Decided: September 24, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished p
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6366 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CLEVELAND NELSON, a/k/a Cleve, a/k/a Fat Daddy, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (3:94-cr-00057-H-2) Submitted: September 15, 2014 Decided: September 24, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished pe..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6366
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
CLEVELAND NELSON, a/k/a Cleve, a/k/a Fat Daddy,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard,
Senior District Judge. (3:94-cr-00057-H-2)
Submitted: September 15, 2014 Decided: September 24, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Cleveland Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Shailika K. Shah, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cleveland Nelson appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2012) 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. Nelson, No. 3:94-cr-00057-H-2
(E.D.N.C. Feb. 26, 2014). We deny the motion for summary
disposition and 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