Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Roberto Sanchez-Roque, 16-7152 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 16-7152 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jan. 10, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7152 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERTO SANCHEZ-ROQUE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:12-cr-00152-REP-2) Submitted: December 28, 2016 Decided: January 10, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini
More
                            UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 16-7152


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

ROBERTO SANCHEZ-ROQUE,

                Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.    Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:12-cr-00152-REP-2)


Submitted:   December 28, 2016            Decided:   January 10, 2017


Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and THACKER, Circuit
Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Roberto Sanchez-Roque, Appellant Pro Se. Peter Sinclair Duffey,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Roberto      Sanchez-Roque    appeals   the   district     court’s     order

denying    his    18   U.S.C.   § 3582(C)(2)   (2012)    motion.       We   have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error.                Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.                   United

States v. Sanchez-Roque, No. 3:12-cr-00152-REP-2 (E.D. Va. Aug.

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

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