Filed: Oct. 15, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7053 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BOBBY MICHAEL JORDAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:04-cr-00357-NCT-1) Submitted: October 11, 2012 Decided: October 15, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobby Mic
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7053 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BOBBY MICHAEL JORDAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:04-cr-00357-NCT-1) Submitted: October 11, 2012 Decided: October 15, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobby Mich..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7053 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BOBBY MICHAEL JORDAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:04-cr-00357-NCT-1) Submitted: October 11, 2012 Decided: October 15, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobby Michael Jordan, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Michael Hamilton, Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Bobby Michael Jordan appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion by the district court. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Jordan, No. 1:04-cr-00357-NCT-1 (M.D.N.C. May 25, 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
