Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Elan Lewis, 16-7615 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 16-7615 Visitors: 97
Filed: Apr. 27, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7615 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ELAN CHRISTOPHER LEWIS, a/k/a Jamal Xavier Harris, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:94-cr-00094-JAG-1) Submitted: April 25, 2017 Decided: April 27, 2017 Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. E
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 16-7615


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                    Plaintiff - Appellee,

             v.

ELAN CHRISTOPHER LEWIS, a/k/a Jamal Xavier Harris,

                    Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:94-cr-00094-JAG-1)


Submitted: April 25, 2017                                         Decided: April 27, 2017


Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Elan Christopher Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. David Thomas Maguire, Assistant United
States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

      Elan Christopher Lewis appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for a

reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) and denying his motion

for reconsideration.   We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.

Lewis, No. 3:94-cr-00094-JAG-1 (E.D. Va. Nov. 9, 2016 & Nov. 30, 2016). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the 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