Filed: Jul. 18, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6511 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. FRANK LEON ROBINSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (1:98-cr-00523-JFA-1) Submitted: July 11, 2012 Decided: July 18, 2012 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frank Leon Robinson, Appell
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6511 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. FRANK LEON ROBINSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (1:98-cr-00523-JFA-1) Submitted: July 11, 2012 Decided: July 18, 2012 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frank Leon Robinson, Appella..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6511
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FRANK LEON ROBINSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (1:98-cr-00523-JFA-1)
Submitted: July 11, 2012 Decided: July 18, 2012
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Frank Leon Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Jane Barrett Taylor,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Frank Leon Robinson appeals the district court’s
orders denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a
sentence reduction and motion for reconsideration. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we grant Robinson leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm
the denial of Robinson’s § 3582(c)(2) motion for the reasons
stated by the district court. United States v. Robinson, No.
1:98-cr-00523-JFA-1 (D.S.C. Jan. 17, 2012). Because the
district court lacked the authority to consider Robinson’s
motion to reconsider, see United States v. Goodwyn,
596 F.3d
233, 235-36 (4th Cir. 2010), we affirm the district court’s
denial of relief. 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
2