Filed: Oct. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7080 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JACIE ELIZABETH KYGER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (5:12-cr-00042-MFU-1) Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 20, 2015 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jacie Elizabeth
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7080 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JACIE ELIZABETH KYGER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (5:12-cr-00042-MFU-1) Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 20, 2015 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jacie Elizabeth K..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7080
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JACIE ELIZABETH KYGER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Michael F. Urbanski,
District Judge. (5:12-cr-00042-MFU-1)
Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 20, 2015
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jacie Elizabeth Kyger, Appellant Pro Se. Grayson A. Hoffman,
Assistant United States Attorney, Harrisonburg, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jacie Elizabeth Kyger appeals the district court’s order
denying her 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2012) motion. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.
Kyger, No. 5:12-cr-00042-MFU-1 (W.D. Va. June 25, 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