Filed: Mar. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7715 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERT MOSES WILKERSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:96-cr-00167-H-1) Submitted: February 25, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014 Before WILKINSON, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirme
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7715 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERT MOSES WILKERSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:96-cr-00167-H-1) Submitted: February 25, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014 Before WILKINSON, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7715
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROBERT MOSES WILKERSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard,
Senior District Judge. (5:96-cr-00167-H-1)
Submitted: February 25, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014
Before WILKINSON, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Moses Wilkerson, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer,
Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Moses Wilkerson appeals the district court’s
order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for
sentence reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
order. United States v. Wilkerson, No. 5:96-cr-00167-H-1
(E.D.N.C. Oct. 7, 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