Filed: Aug. 25, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6056 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAQUAN TYREK BROWN, a/k/a Scutter, a/k/a Scutter P, a/k/a Keith Martin, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior District Judge. (2:11-cr-00472-PMD-16) Submitted: August 24, 2016 Decided: August 25, 2016 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by u
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6056 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAQUAN TYREK BROWN, a/k/a Scutter, a/k/a Scutter P, a/k/a Keith Martin, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior District Judge. (2:11-cr-00472-PMD-16) Submitted: August 24, 2016 Decided: August 25, 2016 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by un..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6056
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAQUAN TYREK BROWN, a/k/a Scutter, a/k/a Scutter P, a/k/a
Keith Martin,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior
District Judge. (2:11-cr-00472-PMD-16)
Submitted: August 24, 2016 Decided: August 25, 2016
Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Daquan Tyrek Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Sean Kittrell, Assistant
United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Daquan Tyrek Brown appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence
reduction. 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. 2:11-cr-00472-PMD-
16 (D.S.C. Jan. 6, 2016); see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
§ 1B1.10(a)(2)(B). 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