Filed: Aug. 27, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6737 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TERESA MAYS, a/k/a Toreatha A. Beaty, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (0:97-cr-00105-CMC-1) Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: August 27, 2008 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6737 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TERESA MAYS, a/k/a Toreatha A. Beaty, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (0:97-cr-00105-CMC-1) Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: August 27, 2008 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6737 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TERESA MAYS, a/k/a Toreatha A. Beaty, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (0:97-cr-00105-CMC-1) Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: August 27, 2008 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Teresa Mays, Appellant Pro Se. James Chris Leventis, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Teresa Mays appeals the district court’s order denying her 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000) motion for sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Mays, No. 0:97-cr-00105-CMC-1 (D.S.C. Apr. 24, 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
