Filed: Jul. 21, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6587 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ANNE MARIE CHAMBERS, a/k/a Sugar, a/k/a Anne Marie Jack, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:94-cr-00089-JRS-2) Submitted: July 12, 2010 Decided: July 21, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6587 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ANNE MARIE CHAMBERS, a/k/a Sugar, a/k/a Anne Marie Jack, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:94-cr-00089-JRS-2) Submitted: July 12, 2010 Decided: July 21, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed b..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6587
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANNE MARIE CHAMBERS, a/k/a Sugar, a/k/a Anne Marie Jack,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief
District Judge. (3:94-cr-00089-JRS-2)
Submitted: July 12, 2010 Decided: July 21, 2010
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anne Marie Chambers, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Daniel Cooke,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anne Marie Chambers appeals the district court’s order
denying her motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
(2006), which sought a reduction in sentence based upon the
amendments to the crack cocaine sentencing guidelines. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Chambers, No. 3:94-cr-00089-JRS-2 (E.D. Va. Nov. 30,
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