Filed: Mar. 24, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8491 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICAH DANIEL JORDAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:99-cr-00019-JBF-1) Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 24, 2009 Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Micah Daniel Jordan, Appellant P
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8491 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICAH DANIEL JORDAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:99-cr-00019-JBF-1) Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 24, 2009 Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Micah Daniel Jordan, Appellant Pr..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8491 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICAH DANIEL JORDAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:99-cr-00019-JBF-1) Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 24, 2009 Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Micah Daniel Jordan, Appellant Pro Se. James Ashford Metcalfe, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Micah Daniel Jordan appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 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. See United States v. Jordan, No. 2:99- cr-00019-JBF-1 (E.D. Va. dated Oct. 21, 2008; entered Oct. 23, 2008). We dispense with oral argument as the facts and legal contentions are adequately addressed in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
