Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Justin Hawkins, 14-6000 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-6000 Visitors: 47
Filed: Mar. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6000 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JUSTIN HAWKINS, a/k/a Main, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:98-cr-00016-BO-1) Submitted: February 27, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Justin Hawkins, Ap
More
                              UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 14-6000


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

JUSTIN HAWKINS, a/k/a Main,

                Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.   Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:98-cr-00016-BO-1)


Submitted:   February 27, 2014              Decided:   March 5, 2014


Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Justin Hawkins, Appellant Pro Se.     Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Shailika K. Shah, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

          Justin   Hawkins   appeals   the   district   court’s   order

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) 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. Hawkins, No. 5:98-cr-00016-BO-

1 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 11, 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

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer