Filed: Jul. 31, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6293 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOSEPH BUTLER, a/k/a Monkey, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (4:05-cr-00037-RBS-FBS-7) Submitted: June 26, 2019 Decided: July 31, 2019 Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Butler,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6293 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOSEPH BUTLER, a/k/a Monkey, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (4:05-cr-00037-RBS-FBS-7) Submitted: June 26, 2019 Decided: July 31, 2019 Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Butler, A..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6293
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOSEPH BUTLER, a/k/a Monkey,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (4:05-cr-00037-RBS-FBS-7)
Submitted: June 26, 2019 Decided: July 31, 2019
Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph Butler, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Joseph Butler appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence
reduction pursuant to the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 404,
132 Stat. 5194, 5222. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.
Butler, No. 4:05-cr-00037-RBS-FBS-7 (E.D. Va. Feb. 15, 2019). 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