Filed: Jul. 03, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6623 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. PATRICK EARL FRANCIS, a/k/a Jerome Brown, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:94-cr-40106-JLK) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 3, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6623 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. PATRICK EARL FRANCIS, a/k/a Jerome Brown, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:94-cr-40106-JLK) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 3, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per c..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6623 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. PATRICK EARL FRANCIS, a/k/a Jerome Brown, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:94-cr-40106-JLK) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 3, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Patrick Earl Francis, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Patrick Earl Francis appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of a prior order denying his motion for sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Francis, No. 7:94-cr-40106- JKL (W.D. Va. Apr. 3, 2008). 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 -
