Filed: Sep. 01, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6918 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. NATHAN KINTA WILKINS, a/k/a Kat Daddy, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (4:08-cr-00043-FL-1) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: September 1, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6918 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. NATHAN KINTA WILKINS, a/k/a Kat Daddy, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (4:08-cr-00043-FL-1) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: September 1, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6918
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
NATHAN KINTA WILKINS, a/k/a Kat Daddy,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (4:08-cr-00043-FL-1)
Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: September 1, 2015
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nathan Kinta Wilkins, Appellant Pro Se. William Glenn Perry,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, North
Carolina; Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Nathan Kinta Wilkins 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. Wilkins, No. 4:08-cr-00043-FL-
1 (E.D.N.C. June 2, 2015). 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