Filed: May 26, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7506 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. THOMAS LESTER KETELSEN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:04-cr-00070-LHT-1) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 26, 2009 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Lester Ketelsen, Ap
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7506 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. THOMAS LESTER KETELSEN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:04-cr-00070-LHT-1) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 26, 2009 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Lester Ketelsen, App..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7506 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. THOMAS LESTER KETELSEN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:04-cr-00070-LHT-1) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 26, 2009 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Lester Ketelsen, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C. F. Shappert, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Thomas Lester Ketelsen appeals the district court’s order denying Ketelsen’s motion to amend the 2004 judgment sentencing him to 210 months’ imprisonment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Ketelsen, No. 1:04-cr-00070-LHT-1 (W.D.N.C. July 21, 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
