Filed: Sep. 14, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6912 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAVID EDWARD ADAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (7:06-cr-00022-SGW-1) Submitted: September 9, 2015 Decided: September 14, 2015 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Edward Adams, Appell
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6912 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAVID EDWARD ADAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (7:06-cr-00022-SGW-1) Submitted: September 9, 2015 Decided: September 14, 2015 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Edward Adams, Appella..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6912
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAVID EDWARD ADAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, District
Judge. (7:06-cr-00022-SGW-1)
Submitted: September 9, 2015 Decided: September 14, 2015
Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Edward Adams, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford,
Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Edward Adams appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012). We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Adams,
No. 7:06-cr-00022-SGW-1 (W.D. Va. May 28, 2015). 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