Filed: Apr. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7474 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. MIKE ANDREW BROCKETT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (2:92-cr-00088-4) Submitted: March 31, 2016 Decided: April 29, 2016 Before MOTZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7474 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. MIKE ANDREW BROCKETT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (2:92-cr-00088-4) Submitted: March 31, 2016 Decided: April 29, 2016 Before MOTZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mik..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7474
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
MIKE ANDREW BROCKETT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
District Judge. (2:92-cr-00088-4)
Submitted: March 31, 2016 Decided: April 29, 2016
Before MOTZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mike Andrew Brockett, Appellant Pro Se. Alyssa Kate Nichol,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mike Andrew Brockett appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction
of his sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in
forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. United States v. Brockett, No. 2:92-cr-00088-4 (E.D. Va.
July 24, 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