Filed: Jun. 20, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6768 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RODNEY LORENZO WYATT, JR., a/k/a Rodney Lorenzo Wyatt, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:09-cr-00133-REP-1) Submitted: June 14, 2012 Decided: June 20, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per cur
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6768 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RODNEY LORENZO WYATT, JR., a/k/a Rodney Lorenzo Wyatt, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:09-cr-00133-REP-1) Submitted: June 14, 2012 Decided: June 20, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6768
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RODNEY LORENZO WYATT, JR., a/k/a Rodney Lorenzo Wyatt,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:09-cr-00133-REP-1)
Submitted: June 14, 2012 Decided: June 20, 2012
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rodney Lorenzo Wyatt, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Angela Mastandrea-
Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Rodney Lorenzo Wyatt, Jr., appeals the district
court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) 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. Wyatt, No. 3:09-
cr-00133-REP-1 (E.D. Va. Mar. 28, 2012). We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
*
To the extent Wyatt also challenges the validity of his
conviction and sentence, such claims are not properly raised in
a § 3582 motion. See United States v. Stewart,
595 F.3d 197,
201 (4th Cir. 2010) (noting that § 3582 proceeding is “not
considered a full resentencing by the court”).
2