Filed: Dec. 22, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7567 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. RONALD L. BARBER, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (8:12-cr-00949-JMC-9) Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 22, 2015 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinio
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7567 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. RONALD L. BARBER, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (8:12-cr-00949-JMC-9) Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 22, 2015 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7567
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
RONALD L. BARBER, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (8:12-cr-00949-JMC-9)
Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 22, 2015
Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald L. Barber, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, Leesa
Washington, Assistant United States Attorneys, Andrew Burke
Moorman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ronald Barber, Jr., appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence
reduction based on Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing
Guidelines Manual. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. See United States v. Barber, No.
8:12-cr-00949-JMC-9 (D.S.C. Sept. 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