Filed: Jul. 28, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6833 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DURRELL TOPPIN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cr-00013-JCC-3) Submitted: July 22, 2008 Decided: July 28, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Durrell Toppin, Appellant P
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6833 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DURRELL TOPPIN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cr-00013-JCC-3) Submitted: July 22, 2008 Decided: July 28, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Durrell Toppin, Appellant Pr..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6833 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DURRELL TOPPIN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cr-00013-JCC-3) Submitted: July 22, 2008 Decided: July 28, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Durrell Toppin, Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Joseph Leiser, Michael Edward Rich, Assistant United States Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Durrell Toppin appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 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. Toppin, No. 1:07-cr-00013-JCC-3 (E.D. Va. May 8, 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 -
