Filed: Sep. 07, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6875 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERT JONES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cr-00001-JCC-4) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 7, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6875 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERT JONES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cr-00001-JCC-4) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 7, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6875
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROBERT JONES,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (1:08-cr-00001-JCC-4)
Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 7, 2010
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Joseph Leiser, Steven
Donald Mellin, Assistant United States Attorneys, Alexandria,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Jones appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. See United States
v. Jones, No. 1:08-cr-00001-JCC-4 (E.D. Va. June 10, 2010);
United States v. Hood,
556 F.3d 226 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, __
U.S. __,
130 S. Ct. 321 (2009) (noting that defendant convicted
of a crack offense, but sentenced pursuant to a mandatory
statutory minimum sentence, is ineligible for a reduction under
§ 3582(c)(2)). 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