U.S. v. STEGLICH, 10-7419. (2010)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20101229112
Visitors: 5
Filed: Dec. 29, 2010
Latest Update: Dec. 29, 2010
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lance Bishop Steglich appeals the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. 3582 (2006) 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. Steglich , No. 3:00-cr-00063-jpj-9 (W.D. Va. Sept. 28, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately p
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lance Bishop Steglich appeals the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. 3582 (2006) 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. Steglich , No. 3:00-cr-00063-jpj-9 (W.D. Va. Sept. 28, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pr..
More
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lance Bishop Steglich appeals the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006) 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. Steglich, No. 3:00-cr-00063-jpj-9 (W.D. Va. Sept. 28, 2010). 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.
Source: Leagle
