Filed: Dec. 29, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8118 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILBUR EDDIS CLINE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (6:04-cr-01066-HFF-4) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 29, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wilbur Eddis Cline, Appel
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8118 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILBUR EDDIS CLINE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (6:04-cr-01066-HFF-4) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 29, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wilbur Eddis Cline, Appell..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8118 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILBUR EDDIS CLINE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (6:04-cr-01066-HFF-4) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 29, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wilbur Eddis Cline, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wilbur Eddis Cline 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 affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Cline, No. 6:04-cr-01066-HFF-4 (D.S.C. Sept. 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
