Filed: Sep. 30, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6774 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOSE MANUEL-CALIXT MENDEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:09-cr-00052-FL-1) Submitted: September 25, 2014 Decided: September 30, 2014 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6774 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOSE MANUEL-CALIXT MENDEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:09-cr-00052-FL-1) Submitted: September 25, 2014 Decided: September 30, 2014 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cur..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6774
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOSE MANUEL-CALIXT MENDEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (7:09-cr-00052-FL-1)
Submitted: September 25, 2014 Decided: September 30, 2014
Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jose Manuel-Calixt Mendez, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-
Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Joshua Bryan Royster,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jose Manuel-Calixt Mendez appeals the district court’s
order denying relief on his motion for modification of sentence,
18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c) (2012). We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Mendez,
No. 7:09-cr-00052-FL-1 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 18, 2014). 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