Filed: Feb. 26, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7783 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. YULIAN CARILLO-TAMAYO, a/k/a Frank, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (5:12-cr-00563-MBS-2) Submitted: February 23, 2016 Decided: February 26, 2016 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpub
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7783 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. YULIAN CARILLO-TAMAYO, a/k/a Frank, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (5:12-cr-00563-MBS-2) Submitted: February 23, 2016 Decided: February 26, 2016 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpubl..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7783
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
YULIAN CARILLO-TAMAYO, a/k/a Frank,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior
District Judge. (5:12-cr-00563-MBS-2)
Submitted: February 23, 2016 Decided: February 26, 2016
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Yulian Carillo-Tamayo, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale,
Jane Barrett Taylor, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Yulian Carillo-Tamayo appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction
of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. United States v. Carillo-Tamayo, No. 5:12-cr-
00563-MBS-2 (D.S.C. Oct. 26, 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