Filed: Oct. 22, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7257 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WAINSWORTH MARCELLUS HALL, a/k/a Unique, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:93-cr-00162-RAJ-1) Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 22, 2009 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wainswor
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7257 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WAINSWORTH MARCELLUS HALL, a/k/a Unique, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:93-cr-00162-RAJ-1) Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 22, 2009 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wainswort..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7257 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WAINSWORTH MARCELLUS HALL, a/k/a Unique, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:93-cr-00162-RAJ-1) Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 22, 2009 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wainsworth Marcellus Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Howard Jacob Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wainsworth Marcellus Hall appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 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. Hall, No. 2:93-cr-00162-RAJ-1 (E.D. Va. June 22, 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
