Filed: Jul. 02, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8381 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. RICKY GEE, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:03-cr-00394-JRS-11) Submitted: April 29, 2009 Decided: July 2, 2009 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ricky Gee, Appellant Pro Se. Richa
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8381 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. RICKY GEE, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:03-cr-00394-JRS-11) Submitted: April 29, 2009 Decided: July 2, 2009 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ricky Gee, Appellant Pro Se. Richar..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-8381
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
RICKY GEE,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief
District Judge. (3:03-cr-00394-JRS-11)
Submitted: April 29, 2009 Decided: July 2, 2009
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ricky Gee, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Daniel Cooke, Assistant
United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ricky Gee appeals the district court’s order granting
in part his motion for sentence modification under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion
to seal its informal response brief and affirm the district
court’s order. United States v. Gee, No. 3:03-cr-00394-JRS-11
(E.D. Va. Oct. 14, 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