Filed: Mar. 03, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7756 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CLEVELAND DARNELL COPELAND, a/k/a Darnell, a/k/a Heavy D., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:00-cr-00424-PJM-15) Submitted: February 16, 2010 Decided: March 3, 2010 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per cu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7756 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CLEVELAND DARNELL COPELAND, a/k/a Darnell, a/k/a Heavy D., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:00-cr-00424-PJM-15) Submitted: February 16, 2010 Decided: March 3, 2010 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per cur..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7756 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CLEVELAND DARNELL COPELAND, a/k/a Darnell, a/k/a Heavy D., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:00-cr-00424-PJM-15) Submitted: February 16, 2010 Decided: March 3, 2010 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cleveland Darnell Copeland, Appellant Pro Se. John Walter Sippel, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Cleveland Darnell Copeland appeals the district court’s denial of his motions for reduction of sentence, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (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. Copeland, No. 8:00-cr-00424-PJM-15 (D. Md. Aug. 20, 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
