Filed: Jan. 08, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7157 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DARRYL MAYES PROCTOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (7:07-cr-00711-TMC-1) Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: January 8, 2014 Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darryl Mayes Proctor, Appell
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7157 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DARRYL MAYES PROCTOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (7:07-cr-00711-TMC-1) Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: January 8, 2014 Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darryl Mayes Proctor, Appella..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7157 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DARRYL MAYES PROCTOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (7:07-cr-00711-TMC-1) Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: January 8, 2014 Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darryl Mayes Proctor, Appellant Pro Se. Jimmie Ewing, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina; Elizabeth Howard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Darryl Mayes Proctor appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Proctor, No. 7:07-cr-00711-TMC-1 (D.S.C. June 13, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
