Filed: May 17, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6529 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERT FERDINAND ANNEHEIM, a/k/a Bobby, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:99-cr-00020-RLV-2) Submitted: March 25, 2010 Decided: May 17, 2010 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpub
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6529 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERT FERDINAND ANNEHEIM, a/k/a Bobby, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:99-cr-00020-RLV-2) Submitted: March 25, 2010 Decided: May 17, 2010 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpubl..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6529
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROBERT FERDINAND ANNEHEIM, a/k/a Bobby,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge. (5:99-cr-00020-RLV-2)
Submitted: March 25, 2010 Decided: May 17, 2010
Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Ferdinand Anneheim, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Jack
Higdon, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Ferdinand Anneheim appeals the district court’s
order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Anneheim, No. 5:99-cr-00020-RLV-2 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 4,
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