Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Peay, 99-7519 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-7519 Visitors: 50
Filed: Dec. 30, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7519 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LINDA MITCHELL PEAY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-90-89-G, CR-90-109-WS) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpu
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7519 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LINDA MITCHELL PEAY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-90-89-G, CR-90-109-WS) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Linda Mitchell Peay, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin H. White, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Linda Mitchell Peay appeals the district court’s order dis- missing her motion for reduction of her term of imprisonment pur- suant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c)(2) (West Supp. 1999). We have re- viewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no re- versible error. Accordingly, we deny Peay’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Peay, Nos. CR-90-89-G; CR-90-109-01-WS (M.D.N.C. Sept. 29, 1999). 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer