Filed: May 05, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6281 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. ANTHONY WENDELL BRIM, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (4:06-cr-00009-jlk-4) Submitted: April 20, 2011 Decided: May 5, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6281 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. ANTHONY WENDELL BRIM, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (4:06-cr-00009-jlk-4) Submitted: April 20, 2011 Decided: May 5, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6281
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ANTHONY WENDELL BRIM,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (4:06-cr-00009-jlk-4)
Submitted: April 20, 2011 Decided: May 5, 2011
Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Wendell Brim, Appellant Pro Se. Craig Jon Jacobsen, I,
Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Wendell Brim appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)
(2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. United States v. Brim, No. 4:06-cr-00009-jlk-4
(W.D. Va. Feb. 17, 2011). 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