Filed: Sep. 19, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6737 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY ANTHONY BROWN, Defendant -Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:98-cr-00037-F; 5:05-cv-00123-F) Submitted: September 13, 2007 Decided: September 19, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by u
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6737 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY ANTHONY BROWN, Defendant -Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:98-cr-00037-F; 5:05-cv-00123-F) Submitted: September 13, 2007 Decided: September 19, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by un..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6737 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY ANTHONY BROWN, Defendant -Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:98-cr-00037-F; 5:05-cv-00123-F) Submitted: September 13, 2007 Decided: September 19, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Anthony Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony Anthony Brown appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000) motion for reduction of sentence and his motion captioned an “unopposed motion for amended judgment and commitment order.” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Brown, Nos. 5:98- cr-00037-F; 5:05-cv-00123-F (E.D.N.C. Apr. 23, 2007). 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 -
