Filed: Jun. 01, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6306 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN WESLEY INGRAM, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:03-cr-00372-JAB-1) Submitted: May 26, 2011 Decided: June 1, 2011 Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Wesley Ingram, Appe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6306 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN WESLEY INGRAM, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:03-cr-00372-JAB-1) Submitted: May 26, 2011 Decided: June 1, 2011 Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Wesley Ingram, Appel..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6306
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOHN WESLEY INGRAM,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Chief District Judge. (1:03-cr-00372-JAB-1)
Submitted: May 26, 2011 Decided: June 1, 2011
Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John Wesley Ingram, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Michael Hamilton,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Wesley Ingram appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion filed pursuant to 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. United States v. Ingram, No. 1:03-cr-00372-JAB-
1 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 11, 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