Filed: Feb. 21, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-7839 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARILYN KIRKLAND, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:17-cr-01022-JFA-1) Submitted: February 18, 2020 Decided: February 21, 2020 Before MOTZ, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marilyn Kirk
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-7839 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARILYN KIRKLAND, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:17-cr-01022-JFA-1) Submitted: February 18, 2020 Decided: February 21, 2020 Before MOTZ, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marilyn Kirkl..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-7839
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARILYN KIRKLAND,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:17-cr-01022-JFA-1)
Submitted: February 18, 2020 Decided: February 21, 2020
Before MOTZ, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marilyn Kirkland, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marilyn Kirkland appeals the district court’s order denying her motion pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 3664(k) (2018) to adjust her restitution payment schedule due to an economic
change in circumstances. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.
Kirkland, No. 3:17-cr-01022-JFA-1 (Nov. 26, 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