Filed: Jun. 06, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6455 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BRITTANY SIMONS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (3:08-cr-01057-CMC-6) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 6, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brittany Simons, Appellant Pro Se. Jam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6455 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BRITTANY SIMONS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (3:08-cr-01057-CMC-6) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 6, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brittany Simons, Appellant Pro Se. Jame..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6455 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BRITTANY SIMONS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (3:08-cr-01057-CMC-6) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 6, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brittany Simons, Appellant Pro Se. James Chris Leventis, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Mark C. Moore, Stanley Duane Ragsdale, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Brittany Simons appeals the district court’s order denying her motion seeking a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error, given that Simons is ineligible for the reduction that she seeks. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. United States v. Simons, No. 3:08-cr- 01057-CMC-6 (D.S.C. Feb. 21, 2012). 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