Filed: May 10, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7729 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. GREGORY M. ELLIOTT, SR., a/k/a Gregory Mondell Elliott, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cr-00097-RAJ-JEB-1) Submitted: April 19, 2011 Decided: May 10, 2011 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7729 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. GREGORY M. ELLIOTT, SR., a/k/a Gregory Mondell Elliott, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cr-00097-RAJ-JEB-1) Submitted: April 19, 2011 Decided: May 10, 2011 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by u..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7729
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
GREGORY M. ELLIOTT, SR., a/k/a Gregory Mondell Elliott,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:07-cr-00097-RAJ-JEB-1)
Submitted: April 19, 2011 Decided: May 10, 2011
Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gregory M. Elliott, Sr., 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Gregory M. Elliott, Sr., appeals the district court’s
orders denying his motion for sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2006) and his motion for reconsideration. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Elliott, No. 2:07-cr-00097-RAJ-JEB-1 (E.D. Va. July
15, 2009; filed Nov. 18, 2010 & entered Nov. 19, 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
2