Filed: Dec. 24, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7649 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERMEER MARSHALL, a/k/a Jermere Yohonn Marshall, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (3:00-cr-00060-nkm-2) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7649 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERMEER MARSHALL, a/k/a Jermere Yohonn Marshall, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (3:00-cr-00060-nkm-2) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7649 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERMEER MARSHALL, a/k/a Jermere Yohonn Marshall, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (3:00-cr-00060-nkm-2) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jermeer Marshall, Appellant Pro Se. Jean Barrett Hudson, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jermeer Marshall appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Marshall, No. 3:00-cr- 00060-nkm-2 (W.D. Va. Aug. 4, 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
