Filed: Mar. 02, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7966 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. VICTOR BARAHONA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (6:10-cr-00054-JMC-6) Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: March 2, 2016 Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7966 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. VICTOR BARAHONA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (6:10-cr-00054-JMC-6) Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: March 2, 2016 Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor B..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7966
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
VICTOR BARAHONA,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge.
(6:10-cr-00054-JMC-6)
Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: March 2, 2016
Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Victor Barahona, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant
United States Attorney, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Victor Barahona appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm the district court’s refusal to further modify Barahona’s
sentence. See United States v. Goodwyn,
596 F.3d 233, 234-36 (4th
Cir. 2010). 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