Filed: Aug. 04, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6321 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. HECTOR EDGARDO RUIZ-ZUNIGO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:05-cr-00039-F-1) Submitted: July 28, 2016 Decided: August 4, 2016 Before DIAZ, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hector Edgardo R
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6321 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. HECTOR EDGARDO RUIZ-ZUNIGO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:05-cr-00039-F-1) Submitted: July 28, 2016 Decided: August 4, 2016 Before DIAZ, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hector Edgardo Ru..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6321
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
HECTOR EDGARDO RUIZ-ZUNIGO,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (7:05-cr-00039-F-1)
Submitted: July 28, 2016 Decided: August 4, 2016
Before DIAZ, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Hector Edgardo Ruiz-Zunigo, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-
Parker, Ethan A. Ontjes, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Hector Edgardo Ruiz-Zunigo appeals the district court’s
order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion to reduce
his sentence under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. United States v. Ruiz-Zunigo, No. 7:05-cr-00039-F-1
(E.D.N.C. Feb. 23, 2016). 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