Filed: Nov. 23, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7117 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LYDELL BROWN, a/k/a Lyndell, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. (4:12-cr-00746-TLW-4) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lydell Brown,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7117 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LYDELL BROWN, a/k/a Lyndell, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. (4:12-cr-00746-TLW-4) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lydell Brown, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7117
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LYDELL BROWN, a/k/a Lyndell,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
Judge. (4:12-cr-00746-TLW-4)
Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lydell Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea,
Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lydell Brown appeals the district court’s order denying his
motion for reduction of sentence under 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. Brown, No. 4:12–cr–00746-TLW-4
(D.S.C. June 23, 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