Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Jermaine Brown, 19-7214 (2020)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 19-7214 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 25, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-7214 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERMAINE ANTWAN BROWN, a/k/a Twalu, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:09-cr-00154-REP-RCY-2) Submitted: May 26, 2020 Decided: June 25, 2020 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, KEENAN, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpu
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-7214 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERMAINE ANTWAN BROWN, a/k/a Twalu, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:09-cr-00154-REP-RCY-2) Submitted: May 26, 2020 Decided: June 25, 2020 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, KEENAN, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Geremy C. Kamens, Federal Public Defender, Frances H. Pratt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Laura J. Koenig, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. G. Zachary Terwilliger, United States Attorney, Richard D. Cooke, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jermaine Antwan Brown appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. United States v. Brown, No. 3:09-cr-00154-REP-RCY-2 (E.D. Va. Aug. 6, 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

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