Filed: Aug. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6412 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. IAN MCDONALD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake and William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judges. (1:05-cr-00146-CCB-1) Submitted: August 16, 2018 Decided: August 21, 2018 Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6412 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. IAN MCDONALD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake and William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judges. (1:05-cr-00146-CCB-1) Submitted: August 16, 2018 Decided: August 21, 2018 Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam o..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-6412
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
IAN MCDONALD,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Catherine C. Blake and William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judges. (1:05-cr-00146-CCB-1)
Submitted: August 16, 2018 Decided: August 21, 2018
Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ian McDonald, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ian McDonald appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for
reconsideration of the court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) and Amendment 782. We have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
United States v. McDonald, No. 1:05-cr-00146-CCB-1 (D. Md. Mar. 29, 2018). 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