Filed: Oct. 21, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6734 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CALVIN EDWARD MILLER, a/k/a Killer, a/k/a Calvin Elwood Miller, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Glen E. Conrad, Chief District Judge. (3:11-cr-00020-GEC-RSB-1) Submitted: October 18, 2016 Decided: October 21, 2016 Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6734 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CALVIN EDWARD MILLER, a/k/a Killer, a/k/a Calvin Elwood Miller, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Glen E. Conrad, Chief District Judge. (3:11-cr-00020-GEC-RSB-1) Submitted: October 18, 2016 Decided: October 21, 2016 Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by u..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6734
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CALVIN EDWARD MILLER, a/k/a Killer, a/k/a Calvin Elwood
Miller,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Glen E. Conrad, Chief
District Judge. (3:11-cr-00020-GEC-RSB-1)
Submitted: October 18, 2016 Decided: October 21, 2016
Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Calvin Edward Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Chase Abendroth,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Jean Barrett Hudson,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Calvin Edward Miller appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion. While the
district court found that Miller’s career offender designation
overstated his criminal history, it did not rely on the drug
quantity table in calculating Miller’s sentence. See United
States v. Munn,
595 F.3d 183, 192 (4th Cir. 2010). Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Miller, No. 3:11-cr-00020-GEC-RSB-1 (W.D. Va. May 11,
2016). 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