Filed: Nov. 22, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6686 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. QUATRAIL PAIR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-cr-00400-D-1) Submitted: November 9, 2017 Decided: November 22, 2017 Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Quatrail Pair, Appe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6686 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. QUATRAIL PAIR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-cr-00400-D-1) Submitted: November 9, 2017 Decided: November 22, 2017 Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Quatrail Pair, Appel..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-6686
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
QUATRAIL PAIR,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-cr-00400-D-1)
Submitted: November 9, 2017 Decided: November 22, 2017
Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Quatrail Pair, Appellant Pro Se. Leslie Katherine Cooley, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Rudy
E. Renfer, Assistant United States Attorneys, Tobin Webb Lathan, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Quatrail Pair appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
(2012) motion and his motion for transfer to federal custody. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons
stated by the district court. United States v. Pair, No. 5:12-cr-00400-D-1 (E.D.N.C.
May 17, 2017). 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