Filed: Dec. 02, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8064 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. VERDELL EVANS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (6:02-cr-00612-MBS-1) Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: December 2, 2008 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ve
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8064 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. VERDELL EVANS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (6:02-cr-00612-MBS-1) Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: December 2, 2008 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ver..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8064 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. VERDELL EVANS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (6:02-cr-00612-MBS-1) Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: December 2, 2008 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Verdell Evans, Appellant Pro Se. Isaac Louis Johnson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Verdell Evans appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Evans’ motion for transcripts at government expense and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Evans, No. 6:02-cr-00612-MBS-1 (D.S.C. filed July 17, 2008; entered July 18, 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
