Filed: May 28, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6089 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GERALD SALLEY, a/k/a Arthur Jackson, a/k/a G, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:95-cr-00488-JFA-3) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 28, 2009 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. G
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6089 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GERALD SALLEY, a/k/a Arthur Jackson, a/k/a G, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:95-cr-00488-JFA-3) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 28, 2009 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ge..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6089
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GERALD SALLEY, a/k/a Arthur Jackson, a/k/a G,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (3:95-cr-00488-JFA-3)
Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 28, 2009
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gerald Salley, Appellant Pro Se. Sean Kittrell, Assistant
United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gerald Salley appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c) (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. Salley, No.
3:95-cr-00488-JFA-3 (D.S.C. Jan. 5 & Jan. 30, 2009); see United
States v. Dunphy,
551 F.3d 247 (2009). 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