Filed: May 05, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7855 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RICHARD S. FOWLER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CR- 94-216) Submitted: April 18, 2003 Decided: May 5, 2003 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard S. Fowler, Appellant Pro Se. Odess
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7855 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RICHARD S. FOWLER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CR- 94-216) Submitted: April 18, 2003 Decided: May 5, 2003 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard S. Fowler, Appellant Pro Se. Odessa..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7855 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RICHARD S. FOWLER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CR- 94-216) Submitted: April 18, 2003 Decided: May 5, 2003 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard S. Fowler, Appellant Pro Se. Odessa Palmer Jackson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Richard S. Fowler appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Fowler, No. CR-94-216 (D. Md. Oct. 22, 2002). We grant the motion to file an addendum to the informal brief and 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
