Filed: Oct. 13, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6242 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN D. RIDDICK, SR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:00-cr-00067-JBF-2) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 13, 2010 Before KING, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John D. Riddick, Sr., A
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6242 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN D. RIDDICK, SR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:00-cr-00067-JBF-2) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 13, 2010 Before KING, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John D. Riddick, Sr., Ap..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6242 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN D. RIDDICK, SR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:00-cr-00067-JBF-2) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 13, 2010 Before KING, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John D. Riddick, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael Comstock, Joseph Evan DePadilla, Assistant United States Attorneys, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: John D. Riddick, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Riddick, No. 2:00-cr-00067-JBF-2 (E.D. Va. Aug. 27, 2008). 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
