Filed: Feb. 03, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6918 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. JAMES EDDIE PALMER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:93-cr-00090-AWA-2) Submitted: January 6, 2017 Decided: February 3, 2017 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry Dennis Harmon, Jr
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6918 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. JAMES EDDIE PALMER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:93-cr-00090-AWA-2) Submitted: January 6, 2017 Decided: February 3, 2017 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry Dennis Harmon, Jr...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6918
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JAMES EDDIE PALMER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen,
District Judge. (2:93-cr-00090-AWA-2)
Submitted: January 6, 2017 Decided: February 3, 2017
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Harry Dennis Harmon, Jr., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant.
Andrew Curtis Bosse, Darryl James Mitchell, Randy Carl Stoker,
Assistant United States Attorneys, V. Kathleen Dougherty, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Eddie Palmer appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion nunc pro tunc to adjust his sentence pursuant
to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5G1.3(b). We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Palmer, No. 2:93-cr-00090-AWA-2 (E.D. Va. June 28,
2016). We deny the motion for appointment of counsel and
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