Filed: Sep. 02, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6522 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KENYATTA HASANI ADAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:07-cr-00113-RGD-JEB-1) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 2, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6522 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KENYATTA HASANI ADAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:07-cr-00113-RGD-JEB-1) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 2, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6522
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KENYATTA HASANI ADAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:07-cr-00113-RGD-JEB-1)
Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 2, 2010
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kenyatta Hasani Adams, Appellant Pro Se. Sherrie Scott
Capotosto, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kenyatta Hasani Adams appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 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. See United States v.
Adams, No. 2:07-cr-00113-RGD-JEB-1 (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 24, 2010
& entered Feb. 26, 2010); see also Dillon v. United States, 130
S. Ct. 2683, 2693-94 (2010) (holding that United States v.
Booker,
543 U.S. 220 (2005), does not apply to § 3582(c)(2)
proceedings). 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