Filed: Apr. 28, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7775 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. JERRELL ANTONIO THOMAS, a/k/a Baby Huey, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:94-cr-00069-RGD-3) Submitted: April 14, 2015 Decided: April 28, 2015 Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7775 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. JERRELL ANTONIO THOMAS, a/k/a Baby Huey, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:94-cr-00069-RGD-3) Submitted: April 14, 2015 Decided: April 28, 2015 Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7775
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JERRELL ANTONIO THOMAS, a/k/a Baby Huey,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:94-cr-00069-RGD-3)
Submitted: April 14, 2015 Decided: April 28, 2015
Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jerrell Antonio Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael
Comstock, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jerrell Antonio Thomas appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion in which Thomas
sought a reduction in his sentence based on Amendments 750 and
782 of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.
Thomas, No. 2:94-cr-00069-RGD-1 (E.D. Va. Nov. 13, 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