Filed: May 05, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6173 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TRAVIS LE-RON CARRINGTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:00-cr-00388-JRS-2) Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 5, 2009 Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Travis Le-Ron Carrin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6173 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TRAVIS LE-RON CARRINGTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:00-cr-00388-JRS-2) Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 5, 2009 Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Travis Le-Ron Carring..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6173 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TRAVIS LE-RON CARRINGTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:00-cr-00388-JRS-2) Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 5, 2009 Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Travis Le-Ron Carrington, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholas Stephan Altimari, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Stephen Wiley Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Travis Le-Ron Carrington appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 706. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Carrington, No. 3:00- cr-00388-JRS-2 (E.D. Va. Jan 15, 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
